Anabolic Steroids

Si�n James: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what steps are being taken to tackle misue of anabolic steroids.

Caroline Flint: The Department recognises the harms associated with the misuse of anabolic steroids.
	FRANK, the major cross Government initiative to provide advice to young people in relation to drug misuse includes information on the harms associated with the misuse of anabolic steroids.
	The harmful short and long-term effects of anabolic steroid use are also described in the most recent version of the Department's publication, Dangerousness of drugs (2003).
	In addition, to restrict access to them, anabolic steroids are only available via prescription.
	Needles and syringe exchange services are also available to provide harm reduction paraphernalia for those who are not yet ready to stop using and who are otherwise at risk of blood borne virus infection (HIV, hepatitis B and C) if they share injecting equipment.

Health Care

Barry Sheerman: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what steps her Department has taken to raise awareness of elder abuse.

Liam Byrne: To minimise abuse and neglect of older people, the Department has been active in promoting better and more consistent standards of care through the publication and implementation of the national service framework for older people and the introduction of national minimum standards (NMS) for a range of services provided to older people in their own homes or in care settings. Employers in regulated social care services have a statutory duty to ensure the safety of older people by training staff to prevent service users from being harmed or being placed at risk of harm.
	We also expect local councils and providers of non-regulated social care to comply by No Secrets, a statutory guide for developing a multi-agency framework for prevention and investigation of abuse to vulnerable adults. No Secrets, jointly published by the Department and the Home Office in 2000, provides a complete definition of abuse and a framework for councils to work with the police, the national health service and regulators to tackle and prevent abuse occurring. It encourages councils to publicise their adult protection procedures so that all older people are aware of how to seek help if needed. No Secrets gives local councils the lead for development of adult protection committees. A copy is available in the Library.
	On 7 February, I announced that the General Social Care Council is undertaking a consultation on registering the social care work force. This will allow us to set standards for people seeking social care jobs and to take sanctions against people if they fall below those standards of registration. A well-trained and fully registered work force will enable older people, parents and children to have confidence in the people who care for them.

Hearing Tests

Nadine Dorries: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what steps the Government are taking to reduce waiting times for (a) children and (b) adults who need hearing (i) aids and (ii) tests; and if she will make a statement.

Liam Byrne: Several initiatives have been introduced to improve capacity to deliver audiology services for children and adults. These are the national framework contract (public private partnership) to bring in additional independent sector capacity, the development of a new degree to help to address the shortage of audiologists and the introduction of Hearing Direct that provides follow-up care and advice for hearing aid users who would benefit from this.
	The figures on waiting times for testing and fitting hearing aids are not collected centrally. It is for primary care trusts to ensure their local population benefits from modernised hearing aid services.

High Cholesterol

Andrew Lansley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what steps she is taking to encourage pharmacies to test cholesterol levels.

Jane Kennedy: New community pharmacy contractual arrangements provide the framework for pharmacy to make a positive contribution to tackling key health priorities such as obesity and coronary heart disease and to improving the health of the public, including where health inequalities persist.
	Some pharmacies offer blood pressure testing, cholesterol testing or a range of other screening tests. Such testing should be in accordance with relevant national screening guidelines, where they exist, and in line with local primary care trust (PCT) programmes for prevention and management of risk factors and with robust quality assurance processes.
	The Department published, Choosing Health through PharmacyA programme for pharmaceutical public health, in April 2005, which aims to maximise the contribution of pharmacists, their staff and the premises in which they work to improve health and reduce health inequalities. This strategy will enable pharmacists and their staff to make better use of their skills and it will open up opportunities for pharmacy to make a bigger difference to improving the health of people in England. PCTs can commission local enhanced services to meet identified health needs.
	Although we do not hold details centrally on the number of pharmacists planning to offer health checks or the numbers of such checks, we have developed an assurance framework for PCTs to use in monitoring pharmacy's implementation of new contractual requirements, and also strategic tests for strategic health authorities to monitor how PCTs are using the new framework to deliver key health priorities and objectives locally.

Institutional Care (Disabled People)

Danny Alexander: To ask the Secretary of State for Health when she will consult on the proposal for a right for people with disabilities to request not to be placed in institutional care; and if she will make a statement.

Liam Byrne: We have already consulted on the proposal for a right for people with disabilities not to be placed in institutional care in Independence, Well-Being and Choice: Our vision for the future of social care for adults in England.
	The consultation ran between 21 March and 28 July 2005. An analysis of the consultation was published on 19 October 2005. Copies are available in the Library. Responses to the consultation were mixed and no clear view emerged.

Learning Disability Services

Owen Paterson: To ask the Secretary of State for Health 
	(1)  what the projected out-turn against budgeted expenditure by social services departments for learning disability services is in 200506;
	(2)  what the average expenditure per head of population by social services departments on learning disability services was in each year since 1997;
	(3)  what the total out-turn against budgeted expenditure by social services departments in England for learning disability services was in each year since 1997.

Liam Byrne: Data on projected out-turn and budgeted expenditure by social services departments is not collected centrally.
	While the Department is responsible for establishing overall social care policy, councils have a significant degree of flexibility to manage and direct their own resources according to local priorities and the needs of the communities they represent, including people with learning disabilities. For this reason, we cannot provide a national figure for the funding provided in respect of learning disability services.
	The information available is shown in the table.
	
		
			
			  Gross expenditure on learning disabilities (LD) Gross expenditure on LD per head of population aged 1864 
		
		
			 199798 1,324,047,000 44.55 
			 199899 1,494,930,000 50.06 
			 19992000 1,633,064,000 54.32 
			 200001 1,751,908,000 57.87 
			 200102 1,903,991,000 62.49 
			 200203 2,253,481,000 73.55 
			 200304(2) 2,609,441,000 84.65 
			 200405(2) 2,850,224,000 91.87 
		
	
	(2) Includes expenditure from the supporting people grant.

Sexual Health Services

Anne Milton: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what grants have been provided to help patients accessing sexual health services in Guildford.

Caroline Flint: In February 2005, individual primary care trusts (PCTs), including those covering the Guildford area were notified of their choosing health revenue allocation. A separate breakdown for genitor-urinary medicine was not given. In 200607, 91.5 million will be allocated to PCTs for sexual health modernisation which includes funding for chlamydia screening and contraception and abortion services and a further 111.5 million will be allocated in 200708. In addition, a further 15 million for capital was allocated this financial year for sexual health services and a further 25 million in 200607 for sexual health will be allocated.
	Data on spend on sexual health services in each PCT is not collected centrally.

Waiting Lists/Times

Andrew Lansley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health pursuant to the written answer of 11 January 2006, Official Report, columns 7256W, on Health Committee evidence, how many patients were waiting over (a) six months for in-patient treatment and (b) 13 weeks for out-patient treatment in each week between 4 December 2005 and the first week of January 2006.

Jane Kennedy: The data requested for the weeks in December 2005 is shown in the table. These figures include Welsh patients waiting at English hospitals, who are not covered by the English waiting time targets. As from January 2006, national figures are no longer centrally available, as weekly data is now only collected on a voluntary basis
	Monthly data, published on 3 February 2006, showed that the number of inpatients waiting over six months on 31 December 2005 was 48, including 36 patients waiting at Welsh hospitals, and the number of out-patients waiting over 13 weeks was 171, including 153 patients waiting in Welsh hospitals.
	This contrasts with the position in June 1997 when there were around 370,000 more patients waiting for treatment; 283,000 more in-patients waiting over six months; and 338,000 more out-patients waiting over 13 weeks.
	
		
			  Week ending: Over 6 month in-patient wait Over 13 week out-patient wait 
		
		
			 11 December 2005 14,046 14,814 
			 18 December 2005 10,961 14,838 
			 25 December 2005 Data not collected Data not collected 
			 31 December 2005 973 2,049 
		
	
	Note:
	Figures included Welsh patients waiting at English hospitals
	Source:
	Provider based weekly monitoring data

Special Advisers

Frank Dobson: To ask the Prime Minister what methods he uses to assess the value for money of the employment of Downing Street advisers (a) in general and (b) individually.

Tony Blair: Special advisers are appointed under the terms and conditions set out in the Model Contract for Special Advisers and Code of Conduct for Special Advisers. Individual posts are subject to standardised job evaluation.

Burma

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what is the policy of her Department regarding sourcing goods from Burma.

Elliot Morley: There are no current economic sanctions or restrictions on sourcing goods from Burma and so it would be inappropriate for my Department to set special contract terms for goods made in Burma.
	Government policy on trade with Burma is to offer no support to British companies who want to trade there, informing those who inquire about trade with Burma of the grave political situation, the regime's atrocious record on human rights and record of economic mismanagement. This is in line with the common position on Burma adopted by the EU in 1996 and renewed in 2005.
	As far as I am aware there is no evidence to suggest that my Department has purchased any goods from Burma recently.
	As far as policy on forestry is concerned, the Government are working closely with the NGO Global Witness on how best to protect Burma's forests. Their recent report, A Choice for China calls for a ban on illegally logged timber. It did not, however, support a ban on all timber from Burma in recognition of the complexity of the problem. Instead, Global Witness called for timber companies not to import illegally logged timber, and for the Chinese Government to suspend importation of logs and processed timber across the China-Burma border. This is pending a review of the legality of all logging operations in Kachin state. Global Witness's work has had a significant impact in Burma, and as a result of their highlighting this problem, the State Peace and Development Council and the Chinese Government have taken steps to clamp down on the illegal trade. According to Global Witness, the destructive logging and vast timber trade on the China-Burma border have come to a near halt over the past four months although it is not clear how permanent such moves will be.

Regulatory Simplification

Chris McCafferty: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how many regulatory simplification proposals relating to environmental regulations were received in 2005; how such proposals are made public; and what mechanisms are in place to enable interested parties to comment on these proposals.

Elliot Morley: Since the launch of the Government's regulatory simplification initiative on 15 September 2005, DEFRA has received 20 proposals relating to environmental regulations.
	There is no current requirement to make such proposals public but the Department will consult interested stakeholders before agreeing to take any simplification ideas forward.
	Proposals that are taken forward by the Department will be included in updated versions of DEFRA's simplification plan. The Department's initial plan Lifting the Burden was published in November 2005 and contains details of 64 simplification initiatives that are taking place over the next year. Copies of the plan have been placed in the House Library or can be downloaded at
	http://www.defra.gov.uk/corporate/regulat/pdf/lifting-burden.pdf

Sustainable Procurement

David Drew: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what advice she is offering to other Departments on sustainable procurement.

Elliot Morley: The Sustainable Procurement Task force was set up in May 2005 under the Government's Sustainable Development Strategy. The Task Force, under the chairmanship of Sir Neville Simms, is a business led group reporting jointly to DEFRA's Secretary of State and the Financial Secretary to the Treasury. The Task Force will deliver a Sustainable Procurement National Action Plan to DEFRA and HM Treasury before the end of April 2006, enabling the UK Government to bring about a step change in public procurement such that, by 2009, it can meet the goal in the Sustainable Development Strategy of the UK being recognised as amongst the leaders in sustainable procurement across the EU.
	The Task Force is addressing five key themes: international benchmarking; data and priorities; engaging with the supply base; accountability; and capacity and is building on existing and previous initiatives in sustainable procurement. These include the Market Transformation Programme; the Sustainable Procurement Group; the Quick Wins list published jointly by DEFRA and the OGC; the joint note by the OGC and DEFRA on environmental issues in purchasing; the Framework for the Government Estate, which required every Department to have published a sustainable procurement strategy by 1 December 2005; the work of the Sustainable Development Commission, Envirowise, WRAP and The Carbon Trust amongst others; the work of the Strategic Supply Chain Group; the Public Sector Food Procurement Initiative and the Catering Services Toolkit; the UK's timber procurement policy; and, most recently, the OGC's note on Social Issues in Purchasing. The UK is leading work in the EU on green public procurement under the Environmental Technologies Action Plan. The UK is a member of the OECD Steering Group on Green Public Procurement.
	DEFRA is working closely with its suppliers to ensure that products, equipment and services supplied to it are from approved recognised sustainable sources; has grouped its commodities and services into categories and is implementing a category management strategy; seeks every opportunity to work collaboratively with the NAO, the OGC and other public and private sector bodies to adopt and implement sustainable best practice. Two recent examples include the cross public sector travel procurement tender and the pan Government printed paper contract. DEFRA has also published a Position Statement on DEFRA and Social Enterprise, and the OGC and Home Office have published Think smart.think voluntary sector!
	The Department has published its Sustainable Procurement Strategy and Toolkit at:
	http://www.defraweb/corporate/sdstrategy/operations/partf.htm
	the PSFPI website is at:
	http://www.defra.gov.uk/form/sustain/procurement/index.htm
	the Central Point of Expertise on Timber (CPET) website is at:
	http://www.proforest.net/cpet
	and the minimum environmental products list (Quick Wins) is at:
	www.mtprog.com.
	The OGC website is at:
	www.ogc.gov.uk

Water Supply

Frank Dobson: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what the reservoir capacity of each water company was at the time of privatisation; what the capacity was of the reservoirs of each company or its successor on the latest day for which figures are available; and what the amount of leakage was from the pipes of each water company (a) in 199596 and (b) the latest year for which figures are available.

Elliot Morley: holding answer 6 March 2006
	There has been very little change in reservoir capacity since privatisation in 1989. Overall there has been a balance of some small reservoirs being taken out of operation and some introduced.
	The capacities quoted below are for 2006 and derived from records of reservoirs that fall within the ambit of the Reservoirs Act 1975; it therefore includes the capacity of all reservoirs that are capable of storing water in excess of 25,000 cubic metres behind any form of dam or bunding arrangements. The capacities are listed against the company that owns the reservoir: in some cases the resources of some reservoirs are shared between two or three companies.
	
		
			 Company Capacity (million litres) 
		
		
			 Anglian Water Services 230,000 
			 Bournemouth and West Hampshire Water(4) (4)300 
			 Bristol Water 32,000 
			 Cambridge Water 0 
			 Dee Valley Water 1,600 
			 Dwr Cymru (Welsh Water) 460,000 
			 Essex and Suffolk Water 54,000 
			 Folkestone and Dover Water Services 45 
			 Mid Kent Water 0 
			 Northumbrian Water 370,000 
			 Portsmouth Water 0 
			 Severn Trent Water 270,000 
			 South East Water 9,000 
			 South Staffordshire Water 21,000 
			 South West Water Services 119,000 
			 Southern Water Services 43,000 
			 Sutton and East Surrey Water 10,000 
			 Tendring Hundred Water Services 2,200 
			 Thames Water 160,000 
			 Three Valleys Water 3,300 
			 United Utilities 300,000 
			 Wessex Water Services 12,000 
			 Yorkshire Water Services 190,000 
		
	
	(4) This was zero in 1989.
	The Director General of Water Services publishes leakage figures annually in the Security of supply, leakage and the efficient use of water reports. Total water company leakage, in megalitres per day, was reported as follows:
	
		
			 Company 199596 200405 
		
		
			 Anglian Water Services 242 214 
			 Bournemouth and West Hampshire Water 28 22 
			 Bristol Water 66 53 
			 Cambridge Water 16 14 
			 Dee Valley Water 15 11 
			 Dwr Cymru (Welsh Water) 413 226 
			 Essex and Suffolk Water 90 67 
			 Folkestone and Dover Water Services 13 8 
			 Mid Kent Water 40 29 
			 Northumbrian Water 190 155 
			 Portsmouth Water 30 30 
			 Severn Trent Water 632 502 
			 South East Water 94 69 
			 South Staffordshire Water 93 74 
			 South West Water Services 142 83 
			 Southern Water Services 120 92 
			 Sutton and East Surrey Water 26 24 
			 Tendring Hundred Water Services 6 5 
			 Thames Water 1,110 915 
			 Three Valleys Water 199 149 
			 United Utilities 789 500 
			 Wessex Water Services 133 73 
			 Yorkshire Water Services 495 293

Crown Prosecution Service

Ben Chapman: To ask the Solicitor-General if he will make a statement on the conduct of the Crown Prosecution Service in the trial of Mike McCartney.

Mike O'Brien: Michael McCartney was prosecuted for a single offence of sexual touching. The criteria under which the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) decides whether to prosecute cases is firstly whether there is sufficient evidence for a realistic prospect of conviction, and secondly, whether it is then in the public interest to proceed. The CPS took the view, having obtained advice from independent counsel, that the requirements of both these tests were fulfilled and it was therefore right for the case to proceed.

Aircraft Emissions

Chris Grayling: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what estimate he has made of the level of emissions from aircraft using UK airspace in each of the past 20 years.

Karen Buck: We do not collect data on emissions from aircraft in UK airspace.
	DEFRA have recently published research in Study on the Allocation of Emissions from International Aviation to the UK Inventory. The report is available on the DEFRA website at:
	http://www.defra.gov.uk/science/Project_Data/DocumentLibrary/GA01060/GA01060_3319_FRP.pdf.

British Transport Police

Si�n James: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how many community support officers there are in the British Transport Police in (a) Swansea and (b) England and Wales; and if he will make a statement.

Derek Twigg: As at 2 March 2006 there are 191 British Transport Police Community Support Officers in England and Wales, none of which are presently deployed in Swansea.

Bus Services

Rosie Cooper: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how many bus services have been (a) withdrawn and (b) added to service in (i) England and (ii) West Lancashire in each financial year since 1 April 1998.

Karen Buck: The following table shows the number of bus services added and withdrawn in the UK broken down by Traffic Area since 1 April 1998.
	The data kept by the Vehicle and Operator Services Agency on registered bus services does not differentiate between West Lancashire and the rest of the North Western Traffic Area.
	
		
			  199899 19992000 200001 200102 
			  New Cancelled New Cancelled New Cancelled New Cancelled 
		
		
			 North Eastern Traffic Area 1,127 1,058 669 674 843 697 971 637 
			 North Western Traffic Area 1,243 790 1,077 842 1,147 1048 933 666 
			 West Midlands Traffic Area 525 495 398 335 482 404 347 307 
			 Eastern Traffic Area 1,117 784 690 727 710 941 767 725 
			 Western Traffic Area 592 394 622 2,518 520 456 568 334 
			 South Eastern and Metropolitan Traffic Area 398 273 256 195 218 222 370 206 
			 Total 5,002 3,794 3,712 5,291 3,920 3,768 3,956 2,875 
			 Scottish Traffic Area 673 509 763 704 572 578 901 870 
			 Welsh Traffic Area 199 111 281 251 278 224 270 202 
			 Total including Scotland and Wales 5,874 4,414 4,756 6,246 4,770 4,570 5,127 3,947 
		
	
	
		
			  200203 200304 200405 
			  New Cancelled New Cancelled New Cancelled 
		
		
			 North Eastern Traffic Area 926 477 772 601 842 589 
			 North Western Traffic Area 1,042 578 990 584 1,066 652 
			 West Midlands Traffic Area 371 510 587 475 561 459 
			 Eastern Traffic Area 571 499 670 585 663 542 
			 Western Traffic Area 532 422 652 425 553 404 
			 South Eastern and Metropolitan Traffic Area 275 210 205 121 196 111 
			 Total 3,737 2,696 3,876 2,791 3,881 2,757 
			 Scottish Traffic Area 675 516 540 318 411 258 
			 Welsh Traffic Area 313 208 236 162 293 175 
			 Total including Scotland and Wales 4,725 3,420 4,652 3,271 4,615 3,190 
		
	
	Grand totals
	New Services: 28,084 / 34,519
	Cancelled Services: 24,152 / 29,058

Fair Trade

Andrew George: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how much and what proportion of his Department's catering budget was spent on fair trade produce in the last period for which figures are available.

Karen Buck: Where figures are available, the amount spent on fair trade produce and the proportion of the catering budget that this covers is as follows:
	Government Car and Despatch Agency (GCDA)4,700/20 percent.
	Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA)44,443/24 percent.
	The GCDA data relates to the period from April 2005 to January 2006. Data in respect of the DVLA covers the period from 200405 and includes expenditure on fair trade produce for hospitality purposes and for purchase in staff restaurants.
	Information on the proportion of the catering budget spent on fair trade produce and data on actual spend within our London HQ buildings can only be provided at disproportionate cost.

M4

Paul Murphy: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how many miles of motorway are under repair on the M4 between junction 13 and the Almondsbury interchange.

Stephen Ladyman: A total of 9 miles westbound and 20.5 miles eastbound of the M4 between Junction 13 and Almondsbury is currently subject to roadworks. 0.5 miles of both figures is at Almondsbury, where safety barriers .are being repaired; the remainder is for the installation of electronic driver information systems.

North-east to South Transport Links

Sharon Hodgson: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what steps have been taken since 2001 to improve road and rail links from the North East to the South; and what further plans there are for such links.

Karen Buck: The Secretary of State for Transport through his Department, its agencies and with partners has delivered, and continues to develop, both road and rail projects to enhance the connectivity within and beyond the North East of England.
	In many cases, improvements to infrastructure elsewhere in the country will bring benefits to travellers to and from the North East. In terms of the national road network, table 1 following gives details of Highways Agency schemes in the Targeted Programme of Improvements (TPI) while table 2 relates to projects under development. These tables concentrate on northsouth routes.
	
		Table 1targeted programme of improvements
		
			 Government office Targeted programme of improvements (TPI) scheme names Scheme category Scheme in preparation Scheme on site Scheme completed Date entered TPI Comments 
		
		
			 North East A1 WillowburnDenwick ImprovementY  Completed March 2003 
			 York and Humber A1(M) FerrybridgeHook Moor W  Y   Under construction 
			 York and Humber A1 (M) WetherbyWalshford W   Y  Completed August 2005 
			 East Midlands A1 PeterboroughBlyth GSJ J Y   Added to TPI March 2001  
			 York and Humber A1 Dishforth to Leeming W Y   Added to TPI June 2002  
			 York and Humber A1 BramhamWetherby (including Wetherby Bypass W Y   Added to TPI June 2002  
			 York and Humber A1 Leeming to Barton W Y   Added to TPI June 2002  
			 North East A1 Stannington Junction J   Y Added to TPI October 2002 Completed October 2004 
			 North East A1 MorpethFelton Dualling W Y   Added to TPI July 2003 Subject to regional priorities 
			 North East A1 AdderstoneBelford Dualling W Y   Added to TPI July 2003 Subject to regional priorities 
			 North East A1/A19/A1068 Seaton Burn Junction Improvement J Y   Added to TPI July 2003 Subject to regional priorities 
			 East Midlands M1 J19 J Y   Added to TPI February 2003  
			 East Midlands M1 J6A-10 Widening W Y   Added to TPI July 2003  
			 East Midlands M1 J1013 Widening W Y   Added to TPI July 2003  
			 East Midlands M1 J2130 W Y   Added to TPI 13 April 2004  
			 East Midlands M1 J3031 Widening W Y   Added to TPI 24 March 2005  
			 York and Humber M1 J3132 Widening W Y   Added to TPI 24 March 2005  
			 York and Humber M1 J3234S Widening W Y   Added to TPI 24 March 2005  
			 York and Humber M1 J34N-37 Widening W Y   Added to TPI 24 March 2005  
			 York and Humber M1 J3739 Widening W Y   Added to TPI 24 March 2005  
			 York and Humber M1 J3942 Widening W Y   Added to TPI 24 March 2005  
			 York and Humber M1 J3132 Northbound Collector/Distributor W Y   Added to TPI 24 March 2005  
			 North East A19/A184 Testos Grade Separated Junction J Y   Added to TPI July 2003 Subject to regional priorities 
		
	
	W = widening
	J = junction improvement
	
		Table 2schemes under development
		
			 Scheme name Government office Current position 
		
		
			 A1 Newcastle and Gateshead Western Bypass North East Work on identifying a suitable scheme, in association with regional partners, is progressing 
			 A1 West Mains to Bridge Mill Dualling North East Under development 
			 A19 Moor Farm Roundabout Improvement North East Subject to regional priorities 
			 A19/Coast Road Improvement North East Subject to regional priorities 
			 A1 Redhouseto Darrington Improvement Yorkshire and the Humber Subject to regional priorities 
			 A1(M)J35toJ38 Yorkshire and the Humber Subject to regional priorities 
			 A1 Jockey Lane Grade Separated Junction East Midlands Under development 
			 A1(M)J68 East Subject to regional priorities 
			 A1 BramptonAlconbury East Under development 
			 A1Sandy and Beeston Bypass East Subject to regional priorities 
		
	
	In respect of rail, this year Government are spending 87 million every week to improve the railways. This commitment to our rail network is helping to bring in further substantial investment from the private sector. The Government are investing an unprecedented amount of money in the rail network to address decades of under-investment.
	In terms of specific rail activity, table 3 provides details of key improvements to both infrastructure and services since 2001 and plans currently under consideration.
	In addition, since 2001, over the five year life of the first Local Transport Plans the North East Local Authorities have received in excess of 500 million to invest in capital works in the region.
	
		Table 3rail
		
			  Key improvements/plans 
		
		
			 Services Currently half-hourly service from London to North East on the East Coast Main Line but, by Dec 2007, the new franchise requires GNER to put in 2 further services from Newcastle to London on Sundays. GNER have already put in place an hourly bus link between Darlington Station and Durham Tees Valley Airport. 
			 Infrastructure New infrastructure at Allington Chord was put in place to alleviate a bottleneck on the ECML and increase reliability and capacity of GNER services. 
			 In development Capacity pressures on cross-country services between WM, NE and SW are being examined as part of the re-franchising process. 
			  Future documents that will provide a picture of rail services in the NE and a framework for options for change includesECML Route Utilisation Strategy (RUS)RUS are Network Rail's examination of how to make best use of the capacity available on the route. ECML RUS currently being developed, and expected to be published later in the year.

Overground Train Services (London)

Eric Pickles: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what responsibility he has transferred to Transport for London for the (a) provision and (b) regulation of overground train services in London; and what plans he has to make further such transfers.

Karen Buck: Responsibility for the provision of the Silverlink Metro group of services will be transferred to Transport for London on 11 November 2007.
	Transport for London were passed the responsibility for taking forward the East London Line Extension in November 2004 and will be responsible for passenger services operating on this route, which are expected to begin in 200910.
	There are currently no plans to transfer further responsibilities on London rail services to Transport for London.

Railways

Caroline Spelman: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport 
	(1)  what the levels of overcrowding in peak hours were on train lines on each line and franchise in the West Midlands in each year since 199697;
	(2)  what measures (a) the Government, (b) Network Rail and (c) the Rail Regulator uses to assess train overcrowding in (i) the West Midlands area and (ii) lines not covered by the passengers in excess of capacity measure.

Derek Twigg: Crowding is measured on those services in the West Midlands which are specified by the West Midlands Passenger Transport Executive (CENTRO) and operated by Central Trains. Central Trains count the number of passengers on each train serving Birmingham during the morning and evening peak on two occasions a year. Count data is available from 1999 onwards and the figures have been placed in the Libraries of the House.
	Franchises which are not covered by the Passengers in Excess of Capacity or Passenger Transport Executive capacity regimes are under a contractual obligation to plan their timetable in such a way as to manage passenger demand and prevent overcrowding being concentrated on one route.
	Network Rail is responsible for developing route utilisation strategies, which seek to balance capacity, passenger and freight demand, operational performance and cost. These strategies will then inform the development and delivery of timetables to address future passenger growth.

Army Deployments

Liam Fox: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many tours were undertaken by each regiment of (a) the Royal Logistics Corps, (b) Royal Corps of Signals and (c) Corps of Royal Engineers in the last five years; what the (i) location and (ii) length of each deployment was; and what the length of time between each deployment was for each regiment.

Adam Ingram: The location of deployments undertaken by elements of the Royal Logistics Corps (RLC), Royal Signals (R SIGNALS) and Royal Engineers (RE) over the past five years has been placed in the Library of the House. Such deployments are normally conducted at sub-unit level and below, and vary in duration and composition of personnel involved, some involving a number of short visits to theatre. While the length of time between such deployments (or 'Tour Intervals' (TI)) is not held centrally and could only be provided at disproportionate cost, in general terms the average TI's for each Regiment is as follows:
	
		
			  Months 
		
		
			 RLC 29.3 
			 R SIGNALS 30.2 
			 RE 24.1 
		
	
	Of course, it is recognised that these are pinch point trades where the TI's are much shorter. Future Army structures will address these concerns by investing in trade groups that have been in high demand (such as engineers and logisticians), whilst restructuring the Army to better enable Brigade level operations, including ensuring that each deployable Brigade has its own integral enablers.

Bureau International des Poids et Mesures

Michael Penning: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what the nature is of his Department's financial contribution to the Bureau International des Poids et Mesures; and if he will make a statement on the current programme of that institution.

Barry Gardiner: The DTI pays an annual donation to the Bureau International des Poids et Mesures (BIPM). For 2006 this is 581,346.16 (848,309). The sum to be paid is set according to rules annexed to the Metre Convention of 1875 and is agreed by the General Conference on Weights and Measures which meets every four years, the last meeting being in 2003.
	The BIPM is the international body set up as a result of the Metre Convention with the aim of ensuring world-wide uniformity of measurements and their traceability to the International System of Units (SI). A significant part of its work is in supporting the Mutual Recognition Arrangementwhich allows for the international acceptance of measurement results which are traceable to National Standards.
	BIPM's scientific and technical programme provides it with the ability to carry out its role. It is published by the BIPM and is reported on annually in the Directors report. Significant features of the programme are: the responsibility to conserve and disseminate the primary standard of massthe international prototype of the kilogram; to establish and disseminate International Atomic Time (TAI) and Co-ordinated Universal Time (UTC); and to provide unique facilities such as the International Reference System for radionuclides. Work is also carried out in a number of other aspects of metrology such as length and chemistry.

Migrant Workers

Si�n James: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what recent steps he has undertaken to promote the rights of workers among migrant workers' groups.

Gerry Sutcliffe: We are aware that migrant workers arriving in the United Kingdom to work in a range of industries may face difficulties in understanding their rights. We have offered to work with the Governments of all the new EU member states, to prepare bi-lingual know before you go leaflets for migrant workers seeking temporary work, giving advice on questions to ask before leaving the country and on legal protections offered to workers including details of the national minimum wage and agricultural minimum wage and the relevant helpline numbers. It is particularly important to reach workers in the host country before they leave as it is often much harder to help workers, who may not speak English and have no accommodation arranged, once they arrive.
	To date we have produced leaflets in partnership with the Portuguese, Polish and Lithuanian Governments and are still in talks with other Governments. These benefited from input from the TUC, the CBI and other stakeholders and have been distributed widely in both the workers' home countries and the UK, for example via Citizen's Advice Bureaux. In Poland, for example, they have been publicised on television and our embassy and the Polish authorities have worked hard to distribute them via job centres, recruitment fairs and other channels. The text of the leaflets is also available on the DTI website:
	http://www.dti.gov.uk/er/agency/migrant_workers.htm
	We are currently updating the three leaflets to ensure they contain up to date information on, for example, national minimum wage rates.
	HMRC enforce the national minimum wage on behalf of the DTI. Each month HMRC select a sample of employers with workers from the new European Union accession countries who have registered under the Workers Registration Scheme. These employers are inspected to ensure that they are complying with the requirements of the national minimum wage legislation.
	The Home Office also provide information to workers from EU accession countries. Nationals of the new member states (except Cyprus and Malta) working in the UK are subject to the Worker Registration Scheme. When subject to the scheme, they need to register with the Home Office if they plan to work for more than one month for an employer in the UK. Workers subject to registering with the Worker Registration Scheme receive information on employment rights as a matter of course. A leaflet setting out the rights and responsibilities of nationals from the new member states is available on the Home Office website:
	http://www.workingintheuk.gov.uk/working_in_the_ uk/en/homepage/schemes_and_programmes/worker_re gistration.Maincontent.0003.file.tmp/Home%20Office%20 WRS%2020pp%PROOF.pdf
	The Government's decision that nationals from these countries should have, subject to the registration requirements of the Worker Registration Scheme, access to the labour market and freedom to change employers should mean that they are significantly less vulnerable to exploitation than they were previously.

National Institute for Medical Research

Andrew Dismore: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry whether medical research carried out by the National Institute for Medical Research on the H5N1 avian influenza virus from infected humans needs to be conducted in category 4 containment facilities; and if he will make a statement.

Barry Gardiner: The regulations of the Health and Safety Executive and the advice of the Advisory Committee on dangerous pathogens are the first point of reference in making decisions about the appropriate containment level required for research with a pathogen. The specific advice contained in the HSE's Advice on Working with Influenza Viruses is that H5N1 should be handled in containment level 3.

Newton's Apple Tree

Michael Penning: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what the estimated (a) value and (b) maintenance cost is of Newton's Apple Tree at the National Physics Laboratory; what right of public access to it exists; and if he will make a statement.

Barry Gardiner: As a non-operational heritage asset, Newton's Apple Tree at the National Physical Laboratory (NPL) is not valued on the Department's balance sheet. Its maintenance costs are not separately identifiable from the general grounds maintenance costs at the Laboratory.
	The tree was presented to NPL in 1953 by the director of the Royal Botanic Gardens at Kew and is derived from a graft from an old tree at Woolsthorpe Manor in Lincolnshire, the birthplace of Sir Isaac Newton and where, according to tradition, Newton was inspired by a falling apple in developing his theory of gravitation. The tree at NPL is one of a number of similar descendants around the world. Public access to this tree is not possible but a similar, and perhaps more directly related, tree can be seen at Woolsthorpe Manor, which is in the care of the National Trust.

Cancer

Philip Hollobone: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what the (a) contraction and (b) death rates were for (i) breast cancer, (ii) lung cancer and (iii) prostate cancer in the last year for which figures are available.

John Healey: The information requested falls within the responsibility of the National Statistician who has been asked to reply.
	Letter from Colin Mowl, dated 7 March 2006
	The National Statistician has been asked to reply to your recent question concerning what the (a) contraction and (b) death rates were for (i) breast cancer, (ii) lung cancer and (iii) prostate cancer in the last year for which figures are available. I am replying in her absence. (56592)
	The most recent available information is on registration of newly diagnosed cases (incidence) and mortality for the years 2003 and 2004, respectively. Age-standardised incidence and mortality rates (directly standardised to the European standard population) are given in the table below for selected cancers in England, 20032004.
	
		Directly age-standardised incidence and mortality rates per 100,000 population(7) for selected cancers(8), England, 20032004
		
			  Incidence Mortality(9)(10) 
			 Cancer type/sex 2003 2004 2003 2004 
		
		
			 Breast 
			 F 120.8  29.2 28.4 
			  
			 Lung 
			 M 59.3  53.7 51.7 
			 F 33.4  28.5 28.2 
			 P(11) 44.6  39.3 38.3 
			  
			 Prostate 
			 M 91.1  27.1 26.4 
		
	
	(7) Rate per 100,000 standardised to the European standard population.
	(8) Defined by codes in the International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision (ICD10). In this table lung cancer is taken to be code C34, breast cancer C50 and prostate cancer C61. Deaths were selected using the original underlying cause.
	(9) Residents of England at time of death.
	(10) Figures are based on occurrences of death in each calendar year.
	(11) Personsthe calculated total rate for both males and females.
	Source:
	Office for National Statistics

Cot Death

Mark Oaten: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many post-neonatal babies died from cot death in the period covered by the most recent statistics produced by the Office for National Statistics; and how many such deaths would have been recorded in that period if the rate for post-neonatal first babies inside marriage were applied to all post-neonatal babies.

John Healey: The information requested falls within the responsibility of the National Statistician who has been asked to reply.
	Letter from Colin Mowl, dated 7 March 2006
	The National Statistician has been asked to reply to your recent question on how many postneonatal babies died from cot death in the period covered by the most recent statistics produced by the Office for National Statistics; and how many such babies would have died in that period if the rate for postneonatal first babies inside marriage was applied to all postneonatal babies. I am replying in her absence. (56731)
	Available figures on cot deaths are based on a mention of sudden infant death, cot death, sudden infant death syndrome or some other similar term on the death certificate. This figure is referred to as sudden infant deaths in routine publications.
	In 2004 (the latest year for which provisional figures are available) there were 149 sudden infant deaths in the postneonatal period in England and Wales (0.23 deaths per 1,000 live births). Seven of these were among first babies born inside marriage (0.05 deaths per 1,000 live births). If this rate had applied to all live births in 2004, then 29 babies would have died from sudden infant deaths in the postneonatal period.

Diamonds

Keith Vaz: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what estimate he has made of (a) the proportion of diamonds sold in the UK in each of the last five years for which such estimates are available which were smuggled and (b) the consequent cost to the economy of the UK in lost tax revenues.

Dawn Primarolo: HM Revenue and Customs do not produce estimates in relation to the smuggling of diamonds. Their report Measuring Indirect Tax Losses, available on their website at http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/pbr2005/index.htm provides estimates of indirect tax losses arising from fraud, avoidance and other forms of non-compliance but does not provide specific information on the trade in diamonds.

PAYE

Ian Liddell-Grainger: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what advice his Department issues to PAYE defaulters who have failed to make payments due to technical faults with computer systems on the action necessary to rectify the faults.

Dawn Primarolo: The advice given will depend on the nature of the technical fault. In general terms Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs (HMRC) communicates with employers through a wide variety of media including publications issued by HMRC and publications issued by external organisations to which HMRC is invited to contribute. In addition, extensive guidance and educational material is available through the HMRC internet site. HMRC gives advice through forums such as Working Together and the Employer Umbrella Group.

PAYE

Ian Liddell-Grainger: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what estimate he has made of the total amount of PAYE which was due but was not collected in each year from 200001 to 200304.

Dawn Primarolo: The information is not available for 200001 and 200102. The Inland Revenue accounting year ran to the end of October each year and the figures available for uncollected tax represented net tax charged but not paid as a snapshot view at the accounting date. This did not include PAYE as the liability is only finally established after the end of the financial year. The figures for 200203 and 200304 as follows are a snapshot at 31 March each year, and include estimates of monthly PAYE arrears.
	
		
			   billion 
		
		
			 200203 4.9 
			 200304 5.2 
		
	
	The vast majority of this is paid within a few days of becoming due.

Compensation Orders

David Drew: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what advice he is offering to those responsible for the administration of compensation orders on how to ensure greater enforcement.

Harriet Harman: I have been asked to reply.
	Current legislation dictates that compensation orders must be prioritised over other sums ordered to be paid on conviction by the courts. From 27 March, new enforcement sanctions will be available to all magistrates courts as part of the national rollout of the Courts Act 2003 fines collection scheme, which will greatly improve the collection and enforcement of all financial impositions, including compensation orders. The Green Paper Rebuilding Livessupporting victims of crime (December 2005) proposes extending the current Courts Act 2003 Deduction from Benefit Orders sanction to all cases involving compensation, regardless of default. In addition, HMCS is planning further enforcement blitz operations in areas with sizeable amounts of compensation payments outstanding to specifically target monies owed to the victims of crime.

Detainees (Religious Provision)

David Jones: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what special provision is made in North Wales police premises to accommodate the (a) religious and (b) dietary needs of (i) Christian, (ii) Muslim, (iii) Jewish and (iv) Hindu detainees.

Hazel Blears: The provisions in North Wales police is a matter for the chief officer and information is not held centrally on arrangements in place by individual police forces. The code of practice on detention, treatment and questioning of persons by police officers (Code C) issued under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act requires that any specific dietary or religious beliefs the person may have should be met as far as practicable.
	The guidance Safer Detention and Handling of Persons in Police Custody issued on 8 February 2006 jointly by Home Office, the Association of Chief Police Officers and the National Centre for Policing Excellence states that consideration should be given to providing a separate room which can be used as a prayer room; the supply of appropriate food and clothing; and suitable provision for prayer facilities, such as uncontaminated copies of religious books.

Early Retirement

Philip Hollobone: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many of his Department's employees have taken early retirement in each year since 1997.

Charles Clarke: The number of employees that have taken early retirement in each year since 1997 is answered in the table.
	Home Office employees who have taken early retirement in each year since 1997 are as follows:
	
		
			  Home Office(12)(13) Prison service United Kingdom passport service(14) Forensic science service(15) 
		
		
			 1997 24 n/a 0 7 
			 1998 18 38 0 6 
			 1999(16) 116 65 0 10 
			 2000 15 61  4 
			 2001 17 165 1/2 3 
			 2002 22 92 10 2 
			 2003 40 114  8 
			 2004(17) 167 51 1/2 3 
			 2005 3 47  4 
		
	
	n/a = not available.
	(12) Home Office PIMMS figures 19972004. Fire Service College figures are included within HO figures for the period 1997 to 2002.
	(13) Home Office Adelphi figures 200405 including manual figures for handover period.
	(14) UKPS records 10 cases occurring after January 2000, and none before.
	(15) FSS ceased to be a Home Office Agency on 5 December 2005 figures run to 3 December 2005.
	(16) During 199799 there was a scheme to reduce staff across the HO, due to the introduction of the computerised system (Casework programme in Immigration and Nationality).
	(17) A large early retirement scheme was run in 2004. Of the figures shown 145 of the HO early retirements, and 19 of the Prison Service early retirements fell under the scheme.

MI5

Mark Durkan: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what the budget was for MI5 in Northern Ireland in each of the last five years; and what projections there are for its budget in each of the next five years.

Charles Clarke: The Security Service's budget, which includes its work in Northern Ireland, is paid from the single intelligence account, which also comprises the Secret Intelligence Service and Government communications headquarters.
	For reasons of operational security and efficiency no breakdown of funding between or within the Agencies is published. The total budget for the most recent five year cycle published in the Intelligence and Security Committee's last annual report (Cm 6510) was as shown in the following table. An additional 85 million to be split over the three years 200508 was announced on 25 January 2006, (Hansard Cm 5758 WS) to ensure early delivery of increased capacity to counter the threat from international terrorism in the light of the July bombings in London.
	
		
			million 
			 Financial year Resource Capital 
		
		
			 200203 940 121.8 
			 200304 1060.4 509.9 
			 200405 1156.8 156.9 
			 200506 1156.4 204.9 
			 200607 1266 214.0 
			 200708 1324 229

Royal Victoria Hospital

Iris Robinson: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what investigations there have been into the allegations by consultant surgeons at the Royal Victoria hospital in a letter dated 18 October 2004 to the chief executive of the Royal group of hospitals of obstruction in getting gravely ill patients into theatre for necessary surgery.

Shaun Woodward: The allegations were investigated by the Royal group of hospitals and considered by the Regulation and Quality Improvement Authority (RQIA) as part of its independent review into the lessons to be learnt from the death of Mrs. Janine Murtagh.
	The RQIA's independent review found that
	 . . . in this instance, there was no evidence to substantiate the allegations . . .

Guantanamo Bay

Nicholas Clegg: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what visits to Guantanamo Bay have been made by UK officials since 2001, broken down by (a) Government Department or agency and (b) the date of the visit.

Kim Howells: Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) officials made nine visits to the US Naval Base at Guantanamo Bay, between January 2002 and October 2004, to check on the British detainees' welfare. These visits took place on the following dates: January, February, May and November 2002; April and September 2003; March, July and October 2004. An FCO official accompanied five British detainees back to the UK at the end of the March 2004 visit. An FCO official also visited Guantanamo Bay in January 2005 to accompany the last four British detainees back to the UK.
	UK officials have visited Guantanamo Bay to ask detainees about matters relating to the UK's national security. An account of the intelligence and security agencies' contact with detainees at Guantanamo Bay is set out in the Intelligence and Security Committee's 2005 report, The Handling of Detainees by UK Intelligence Personnel in Afghanistan, Guantanamo Bay and Iraq. This can be found on the ISC website at: www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/intelligence.

Sudan

Angus Robertson: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what recent assessment he has made of the impact of the African Union mission on (a) the security situation in Darfur and (b) the activities of the Janjaweed; and if he will make a statement.

Ian Pearson: The African Union mission (AMIS) is doing a good job under difficult circumstances. Where it has deployed there has been a decrease in attacks by all parties, including the janjaweed Arab militias. In December 2005, the UK participated in an international assessment mission conducting an in-depth review of AMIS. This concluded that AMIS has had a positive effect on both the security and humanitarian situations in Darfur and recommended further steps to increase its effectiveness. We are working closely with the African Union to ensure these steps are taken. The UK has provided more than 50 million to date to support AMIS.

Employment Advisers (GP Surgeries)

Danny Alexander: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions if he will list the private and voluntary sector organisations with which he has held discussions with on (a) placement of work advisers in general practitioner surgeries, (b) provision of work focused interviews for pathways to work and (c) provision of work focused interviews for lone parents.

Margaret Hodge: We have met with a range of people and organisations and will continue to do so as we develop our welfare reform strategy. The private and voluntary sector will have a key role to play in supporting our commitment to help people on incapacity benefits to access jobs. We published our proposals in a Green Paper; A new deal for welfare: Empowering people to work, in January this year.

Welfare Reform Green Paper

Philip Hammond: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions 
	(1)  what estimate he has made of the likely cost savings from implementation of the measures outlined in the Green Paper, A new deal for welfare: Empowering people to work in each year to 201819;
	(2)  if he will break down by expenditure item the planned 360 million investment proposed in the Green Paper, A new deal for welfare: Empowering people to work;
	(3)  what he expects the cost to be for each Pathways to Work scheme in each year to 2008;
	(4)  what estimate he has made of the cost of extending work-focused interviews to all existing incapacity benefit claimants;
	(5)  what estimate he has made of the cost of employing staff to administer the work focused interviews proposed in the Green Paper, A new deal for welfare: Empowering people to work in each year from 2008 to 2018;
	(6)  what estimate he has made of the cost of employing medical professionals to administer the new personal capability assessments proposed in the Green Paper, A new deal for welfare: Empowering people to work in each year from 2008 to 2018; and how many whole-time equivalent medical professionals he expects will be required.

Margaret Hodge: Our Welfare Reform Green Paper; A new deal for welfare, Empowering people for work; set out our proposals for the future of the welfare state and builds on the success of our welfare to work policies such as new deal and Pathways to Work.
	The funding for welfare reform has been drawn from the budgets provided to the Department through the 2004 Spending Review settlement which covered the financial years 200506 to 200708. Details are available in The departmental report 2005 (Cm 6539) published in June 2005. The 360 million funding is largely to be spent extending the Pathways to Work programme beyond the pilot areas and covers 200607 and 200708, but may also be used to fund other measures dependent on responses to the consultation.
	While we are still in the consultation phase a detailed costing of the various parts of our proposals is not possible. This is especially the case in relation to the costs for each Pathways to Work scheme as we are looking to the private and voluntary sector to deliver many of the Pathways schemes and it is not possible to provide detailed costs prior to contract negotiations. This is also the case when it comes to the need for additional medical professionals where we are consulting to develop the detail of the new personal capability assessment. Medical Services will be contracting doctors and other health care professionals where required.
	However, I can tell you that if every current incapacity benefit recipient was given a work focussed interview at least once a year, we estimate the cost would be around 80 million annually. The actual costs would be dependent on the numbers joining and leaving the benefit during any one year. But, although the cost savings from measures outlined in the Green Paper depend to a large extent on the final proposals following the consultation, we know that the existing Pathways pilots are already generating savings, and we expect further savings from further roll-out.

Welfare Reform Green Paper

Philip Hammond: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what additional financial help will be made available to those with the most serious disabilities and health conditions during the three-month assessment phase of the Employment and Support Allowance proposed in the Green Paper A New Deal for Welfare: Empowering People to Work.

Margaret Hodge: We are currently in the consultation period for the Green Paper. This consultation will include looking at the scope for simplifying the benefit structure.
	The Green Paper proposes that, in addition to the assessment phase benefit, those with the most serious disabilities and health conditions may be entitled to the enhanced and severe disability premiums currently available through income support. They may also get help with housing costs through housing benefit and council tax benefit. It also proposes that claimants may be entitled to disability living allowance, which currently ranges between 16.05 to 104.90 per week depending on the claimant's care and mobility needs.

Welfare Reform Green Paper

Philip Hammond: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions 
	(1)  whether the randomly selected ad hoc case checks proposed in the Green Paper, A new deal for welfare: Empowering people to work will extend to incapacity benefit claimants with severe long-term disabilities and health conditions;
	(2)  assessment he has made of the impact of ad hoc case checks on the health of incapacity benefit claimants (a) suffering from stress and mental health problems and (b) with severe long-term disabilities and health conditions.

Margaret Hodge: It is important in the interests of fairness to genuine claimants and to the taxpayer, that we assure ourselves that those claiming incapacity benefits are entitled to do so. This requires regular review and other measures to ensure proper compliance.
	Therefore, in line with our core principle of balancing rights with responsibilities, our Green Paper; A new deal for welfare, Empowering people for work; sets out proposals to introduce an additional safeguard of randomly selected, ad hoc case checks, to be carried out by a dedicated team which would be created for this purpose. Where these checks produce doubt about the nature or extent of an individual's incapacity, a fresh personal capability assessment will be required. This process will provide confirmation to the genuine claimant of the appropriateness and correctness of their ongoing entitlement and also assurance to the taxpayer of the integrity and security of the benefit.
	After completion of the formal consultation period on 21 April 2006, details on the operation of ad hoc case checks will be finalised, along with the other measures in the Green Paper.

Welfare Reform Green Paper

Philip Hammond: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what he expects will be the qualifying conditions for (a) the income-related strand and (b) the contribution-related strand of the employment and support allowance proposed in the Green Paper A New Deal for Welfare: Empowering People to Work.

Margaret Hodge: We are currently in the consultation period for the green paper; A new deal for welfare: empowering people to work. It proposes that the Employment and Support Allowance will replace incapacity benefit and income support (on grounds of incapacity). As now, individuals will be expected to fulfil the relevant medical, contribution and/or income tests to access the benefit.

Local Authority Achievements

Lynne Featherstone: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what guidance he has issued to local authorities on the use of public funds to pay for the promotion and advertising of local authority achievements; and if he will make a statement.

Phil Woolas: The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister has issued guidance to local authorities with respect to publicity in the Recommended Code of Practice on Local Authority Publicity. This is available on the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister's website at: www. odpm.gov.uk/index. asp?id=1133861

Parish Council Precepts

Andrew Murrison: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what the parish council precepts are for England in (a) 200607 and (b) 200506.

Phil Woolas: The information is as follows.
	(a) The total figure for parish precepts in England for 200607, as reported by billing authorities, will be published on the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister's website on 27 March as part of the council tax statistical release.
	(b) The total figure for parish precepts in England for 200506 is included in table A2a of Local Government Financial Statistics England No. 16 2005, a copy of which has been made available in the Library of the House. It is also available at: http://www.local.odpm.gov.uk/finance/stats/lgfs/2005/lgfsl6/h/lgfsl6/xlsfiles/lgfsl6-a-2a.xls.

Supporting People Programme (North Yorkshire)

Anne McIntosh: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what the level of funding for the Supporting People programme in North Yorkshire was in 200304; and what the level of funding was in each of the previous three years.

Phil Woolas: The information requested is following table.
	
		
			  
			 Programme 200102 200203 200304 Total 
		
		
			 Supporting People Programme Grant n/a n/a 16,847,226 16,847,226 
			 Supporting People Administration Grant 188,814 476,645 476,101 1,141,561 
			 Total 188,814 476,645 17,323,327 17,988,787

Electoral Reform

James Duddridge: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Constitutional Affairs what steps the Department is taking to increase voter turnout; what further measures are planned, with particular reference to the local elections in May 2006; and if she will make a statement.

Harriet Harman: The Government has made available 2.5 million to support the new power to encourage electoral participation included in the Electoral Administration Bill. It is intended that this money will enable Returning Officers and Electoral Registration Officers in England and Wales to undertake promotional activity, such as posters, leaflets and outreach work, to encourage registration and/or participation in elections at a local level.
	The Electoral Administration Bill includes a new duty on electoral registration officers (EROs) to take all necessary steps to ensure comprehensive registers. Those steps include the following specific measures:
	(a) Sending the canvass form more than once to any address;
	(b) Making house to house inquires on more than one occasion;
	(c) Making contact by such other means as the registration officer thinks appropriate with persons who do not have an entry in a register;
	(d) Inspecting any records held by any person which the registration officer is permitted to inspect; and
	(e) Providing training to others carrying out the duty
	For May elections in London, the Government is leading in the 1824 Collective campaign to promote awareness of the voter registration. In addition we are piloting early voting in alternative location in some local authorities.

Electoral Registration (Normanton)

Edward Balls: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Constitutional Affairs what percentage of young people in Normanton were not on the electoral register in (a) 1997, (b) 2001 and (c) 2005; and what steps her Department is taking to increase the proportion registered.

Harriet Harman: Electoral registers in the UK do not identify the age of electors and no record is kept of categories of electors upon that basis. However, the independent Electoral Commission estimate in their report Understanding electoral registration (September 2005) that 16 per cent. of 18 to 24-year-olds are not registered and that 28 per cent. of attainers (16 to 17-year-olds) are not on the register.

Peers' Residences

Linda Gilroy: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Constitutional Affairs how many Members of the House of Lords have their main residence in each (a) country, (b) region and (c) county of the UK, broken down by political affiliation; and what assessment she has made of the geographical distribution of Members of the House of Lords.

Harriet Harman: The figures available at the end of March 2005 show there are approximately 556 peers who have their main residence listed in the UK (where known). The following table breaks down this figure further by county, region and political affiliation. The figures exclude new appointments from April 2005.
	Any assessment on the geographical distribution of Members of the House of Lords will be included in the more detailed work on the future composition of the upper Chamber, as part of the modernisation process.
	
		Breakdown of the main residences of Members of the House of Lords as of 31 March 2005
		
			 Region County Total in county Con Lab Lib Dem CB Other 
		
		
			 East61 Peers Bedfordshire 4 1   2 1 
			  Cambridgeshire 12 2 5  3 2 
			  City of Peterborough 1 1 
			  Essex 11 6 4   1 
			  Hertfordshire 14 2 6 1 4 1 
			  Luton 1  1
			  Norfolk 9 3 1  4 1 
			  Suffolk 9 2 2 2 2 1 
			 
			 East Midlands16 Peers Derbyshire 4  2 1  1 
			  East Midlands 1 1 
			  Leicestershire 5 3 1   1 
			  Lincolnshire 2 1 1
			  Northamptonshire 2 1 1
			  Nottinghamshire 11  
			  Rutland 1 1 
			 London134 Peers London 134 34 45 16 34 5 
			 
			 NI13 Peers Armagh 22  
			  Antrim 11  
			  Northern Ireland 3   1 2  
			  South Tyrone 11  
			  Ulster 6 1 1  4  
			 
			 North East10 Peers County Durham 1 1 
			  Darlington 11  
			  Durham 1  1
			  Northumberland 4 1  2 1  
			  South Tyneside 1  1
			  Tyne and Wear 1  1
			  Tyneside 1 1 
			 
			 North West37 Peers Bolton 1 1 
			  Cheshire 8 1 5 1  1 
			  Cumbria 10 3 5  2  
			  Lancashire 7  5 1 1  
			  Manchester 6  5   1 
			  Merseyside 3   1 1 1 
			  North West England 1 1 
			  Stockport 11  
			 
			 Scotland55 Peers Aberdeenshire 5  4  1  
			  Angus 5 4  1   
			  Argyll 1   1   
			  Argyll and Bute 1  1
			  Ayrshire 1 1 
			  Borders (Scottish) 3 1  1 1  
			  Caithness 1   1   
			  City of Edinburgh 2   1 1  
			  City of Glasgow 2  2
			  Clackmannanshire 1   1   
			  Dumfries and Galloway 2 1   1  
			  East Lothian 1 1 
			  Edinburgh 8  2  6  
			  Fife 4 3 1
			  Glasgow 4 2 2
			  Highlands 4 2  1 1  
			  Kincardineshire 1 1 
			  Peeblesshire 1 1 
			  Perth and Kinross 32 1 
			  Scottish Highlands 1 1 
			  South Ayrshire 1 1 
			  Stirling 2 1 1
			  West Dunbartonshire 1  1
			 
			 South East110 Peers Berkshire 7 1 1 1 3 1 
			  Bracknell Forest 1  1
			  Brighton 1  1
			  Buckinghamshire 5 4 1
			  City of Southampton 1  1
			  East Sussex 11 2 6  3  
			  Hampshire 14 7 1 1 3 2 
			  Isle of Wight 2 11 
			  Kent 15 6  2 5 2 
			  Oxfordshire 22 8 7 1 5 1 
			  Surrey 19 6 5 3 5  
			  Sussex 8 3 5
			  West Sussex 4 2  2   
			 
			 South West52 Peers Cornwall 4 1 1  1 1 
			  Devon 4 1 1  2  
			  Dorset 5 2 1  2  
			  Gloucestershire 11 6 2  2 1 
			  North Somerset 1 1 
			  Somerset 16 8  2 6  
			  West Wiltshire 1 1 
			  Wiltshire 10 3 1 3 3  
			 Wales18 Peers Cardiff 1  1
			  Cardiganshire 11  
			  Ceredigion 1  1
			  Clwyd 1  1
			  Conwy 2 2 
			  Monmouthshire 1 1 
			  Powys 7 1 2 3 1  
			  Rhondda Cynon Taff 2  2
			  South Glamorgan 11  
			  Wrexham 1   1   
			 
			 West Midlands22 Peers Herefordshire 1  1
			  Sandwell 1  1
			  Shropshire 3 3 
			  Staffordshire 3 1 2
			  Warwickshire 5 2 1  2  
			  West Midlands 5  3  1 1 
			  Worcestershire 4 1 1  1 1 
			 
			 Yorkshire and the Humber Bradford 1  1
			 28 Peers City of Kingston upon Hull 1 1 
			  East Riding of Yorkshire 1   1   
			  East Yorkshire 1  1
			  North Yorkshire 8 3  2 2 1 
			  South Yorkshire 2  2
			  West Yorkshire 7 1 4 1 1  
			  Yorkshire 7 3  1 2 1 
			 Total  556 168 166 57 132 33

Post-mortems

Andrew Dismore: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Constitutional Affairs what steps she is taking to ensure that coroner's post-mortems do not result in delays in releasing bodies to families of faiths which require funerals to be held within 24 hours of death; and if she will make a statement.

Harriet Harman: For a number of reasons it will not always be possible to authorise the release within 24 hours of the death. The body of a homicide victim may, for example, require forensic analysis. Early release will also depend on the availability of pathologists to conduct post mortem examinations. But coroners fully appreciate the need to release bodies quickly following a coroner's post-mortem examination, and are particularly sensitive to the requirements of faith groups.

Voter Registration

Jim Cunningham: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Constitutional Affairs what steps her Department is taking to increase voter registration.

Harriet Harman: The Electoral Administration Bill takes forward a number of measures to improve voter registration, including a new duty on registration officers specifying the steps that they must take to ensure comprehensive registers and moving back the deadline for registering until after an election has been called (until 11 days before polling day). The Bill also includes a power for returning officers to encourage participation in elections, to promote current best practice already undertaken by some local authorities in this area.
	The Government are actively working with electoral registration officers and community groups to increase awareness on the voter registration in UK and working closely with stakeholders on improving the annual canvass form by making it clearer, simpler and easy to understand.
	The Government have embarked on a number of initiatives, such as the 1824 Collective campaign to promote awareness of voter registration amongst London's urban youth.

Internally Displaced Persons

Andrew George: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what estimate he has made of the number of (a) male and (b) female internally displaced persons in (i) Colombia, (ii) Algeria, (iii) Angola, (iv) the Democratic Republic of the Congo, (v) Cote d'Ivoire, (vi) Kenya, (vii) Somalia, (viii) Sudan, (ix) Uganda, (x) Zimbabwe, (xi) Iraq, (xii) Bangladesh, (xiii) India, (xiv) Indonesia, (xv) Myanmar and (xvi) Sri Lanka.

Hilary Benn: The estimated number of internally displaced persons in each of the countries are as follows:
	
		
			  Number 
		
		
			 Colombia 1,580,3963,563,505 
			 Algeria 1,000,000 
			 Angola 91,240 
			 DRC 1,664,000 
			 Cote d'lvoire 500,000 
			 Kenya 381,924 
			 Somalia 370,000400,000 
			 Sudan 5,355,000 
			 Uganda 1,740,498 
			 Zimbabwe 569,685 
			 Iraq 1,200,000 
			 Bangladesh 500,000 
			 India 600,000+ 
			 Indonesia 342,000600,000 
			 Myanmar 540,000 
			 Sri Lanka 341,175 
		
	
	Source:
	Internally Displaced Monitoring Centre (based on estimates from sources including the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), the ED and UN Office for the Co-ordination for Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA).
	It has not been possible to source data for internally displaced persons broken down on the basis of gender as the Internally Displaced Monitoring Centre, who provide the most reliable and comprehensive data on internal displacement, say that
	such information is rarely available, as in most countries affected by internal displacement, no systematic surveys have been conducted.
	Their Global Overview of Trends and Developments in Internal Displacement published in 2004 estimated that women and children account for between 70 and 80 per cent. of all internally displaced persons worldwide.

Internally Displaced Persons

Andrew George: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development how much his Department has (a) pledged, (b) committed and (c) spent on programmes aimed to benefit internally displaced persons in (i) Colombia, (ii) Algeria, (iii) Angola, (iv) the Democratic Republic of Congo, (v) Cote d'Ivoire, (vi) Kenya, (vii) Somalia, (viii) Sudan, (ix) Uganda, (x) Zimbabwe, (xi) Iraq, (xii) Bangladesh, (xiii) India, (xiv) Indonesia, (xv) Myanmar, (xvi) Sri Lanka and (xvii) in total in each year since 1997.

Hilary Benn: DFID provides Humanitarian Assistance, such as shelter and medical care in emergencies, to Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs), refugees and other vulnerable people, through its country programmes. We do not disaggregate the amount spent specifically on IDPs from the total Humanitarian Assistance. The following table provides figures for humanitarian spend since 1997 for the requested countries. We do not hold separate information on pledges or commitments. It is unlikely that pledges or commitments would differ from spend.
	
		Bilateral Humanitarian Assistance (HA) to Designated Countries since
		
			 Destination 199798 199899 19992000 200001 200102 200203 200304 200405 
		
		
			 Algeria 70,555 3,339 4,955  150,000  324,038 5,799 
			 Angola 1,500,000 2,500,000 3,236,425 2,240,178 2,191,312 6,974,399 4,452,264 2,186,823 
			 Cte d'Ivoire 98,499 36,954   250,000 700,000 200,000 296,016 
			 DRC 806,935 369,794 1,256,946 3,036,086 5,471,321 12,099,347 16,257,584 22,476,819 
			 Kenya 1,337,996 4,621,733 2,542,298 12,463,111 3,413,358 1,473,521 228,551 5,517,057 
			 Somalia 1,047,281 1,079,459 372,475 1,234,680 1,637,637 2,919,590 3,171,561 3,543,346 
			 Sudan 4,337,079 23,496,775 2,773,863 4,491,075 5,164,105 16,337,941 21,872,096 77,965,269 
			 Uganda 657,205 360,269 580,562 535,135 784,782 3,477,988 7,768,171 11,850,714 
			 Zimbabwe 41,404 179,732 212,461 225,455 7,242,305 23,259,500 23,959,598 13,753,181 
			 Colombia 166,398 857,100 265,737 223,859 17,141 3,300   
			 Bangladesh 365,737 15,742,296 745,431 3,496,343 1,780,616 226,404 12,695 25,037,885 
			 Burma 215,650 285,055 206,913 1,030,033 2,088,012 3,163,205 577,504 1,005,000 
			 India 511,936 60,954 3,941,315 20,554,645 6,872,102 5,216,553 1,398,973 441,714 
			 Indonesia 461,300   822,882 750,000 1,500,000  11,123,271 
			 Iraq 3,350,504 5,749,116 6,584,659 9,545,325 7,759,652 18,853,455 110,051,848 21,382,898 
			 Total 14,968,480 55,342,574 22,724,041 59,898,969 45,572,343 96,205,203 190,274,882 196,585,791 
		
	
	In addition DFID provides unearmarked core funding to UN agencies, such as the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), and International organisations, such as the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), who provide assistance to IDPs in country. Since 1997, this has included 76.5 million to the UNHCR and 125 million to ICRC. DFID has provided 2.2 million targeted funding for non-governmental organisations (NGO)s since 1997 for IDP projects, such as the Brookings Institution-University of Berne Project on Internal Displacement.
	In Iraq, our humanitarian spending, as shown above, includes 1.7 million which we allocated to the UK NGO AMAR for their work on IDPs. The United Nations have also assisted IDPs in Iraq. DFID has contributed over 110 million to the UN for their work in Iraq since 2003.

Lesotho

Chris Ruane: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development when a Secretary of State in the Department for International Development last visited Lesotho.

Hilary Benn: In July 2002 Baroness Amos, the then Parliamentary Under-Secretary for Africa and Commonwealth Affairs, visited Lesotho.

Multilateral Institutions

Mark Simmonds: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development if he will make a statement on mechanisms for identifying and correcting poor performance by multilateral institutions.

Hilary Benn: DFID is committed to monitoring the effectiveness of the multilateral organisations it supports. During 2004, we conducted an assessment of 23 multilateral agencies looking at their internal systems. We used a common multilateral effectiveness framework (MEFF) to better understand how well they were organised to deliver their objectives. The assessments were carried out in partnership with the agencies concerned.
	DFID uses the results of the MEFF in conjunction with other assessments, such as the surveys carried out by the Multilateral Organisations Performance Assessment Network, and the reporting of multilateral themselves, to assess multilateral performance and to inform partnership decisions.
	At the country level, we assess the impact and effectiveness of multilaterals with whom we have a relationship drawing on the views of partner Governments and donors. This evidence based approach helps us engage with multilateral at a number of levels and informs our decisions around financing.
	In addition, we undertake monitoring of multilateral organisations working on particular issues, for example the delivery of humanitarian services. These are framed by institutional strategies which set out jointly agreed objectives between DFID and the organisation linked to financial support. The aim is to foster a transparent relationship which set outs clear principals and targets linked explicitly to improving effectiveness.

Overseas Health Workers

John Barrett: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what discussions he has had with his Cabinet colleagues regarding employment of overseas health workers in the UK.

Gareth Thomas: The employment of overseas health workers in the UK is a complex problem which has been discussed in some depth across government and in particular with the Department of Health and with the Scottish Executive and Welsh Assembly.
	As a result of these discussions, we have put in place measures to address the pull factor of migration to the UK of health workers and to promote ethical international recruitment. The UK has adopted systematic policies including:
	Guidance and a revised code of practice embodying ethical principles for the international recruitment of healthcare workers.
	An agreed list of developing countries that should not be targeted for recruitment, which has prevented the NHS and other major health employers from actively recruiting from 150 of the poorest and middle income countries.
	A memorandum of understanding has been signed with South Africa, for qualified healthcare professionals to undertake time limited placements.
	Part of the problem is the chronic under-investment in health workers and health systems in developing countries. This results in low job satisfaction for health workers, which, combined with very low salaries, leads to migration of health workers to the UK and other developed countries. The UK Government support efforts to increase the supply of health workers, through, for example support to the health sector plan and budget or general budget support. This can support payment of salaries and allowances, and increased production of health workers. The UK support is also geared to improving conditions for health workers through improving health systems/health sector policies and increasing innovative approaches to service provision. This is an area which is covered in DFID's policy paper Moving Out of PovertyMaking Migration Work Better for Poor People, which has just been approved by Ministers.
	Since 2000, the UK Government have spent over 650 million on health sector support in Africa, primarily to strengthen health systems including training and retraining health workers. In Malawi for example, we have invested 100 million over six years towards the Sector Wide Approach for health to strengthen health services and increase access to basic health services. The Malawi programme has three main elements:
	improving incentives for recruitment and retention of Malawian staff through salary increases for 11 professional and technical groups5,400 health workers now receiving 52 per cent. salary top-up and over 700 new staff recruited.
	expanding domestic training capacity by over 50 per cent., including doubling the number of nurses and tripling doctors being trained;
	using international volunteer physicians and nurse tutors as a stop-gap measure while more Malawians are being trained.

Population Control

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what recent representations he has received on population control.

Gareth Thomas: The UK all-party group on population, development and reproductive health has invited DFID to contribute to its Hearing in the spring on Population GrowthImpact on the Millennium Development Goals. DFID will be submitting evidence and I look forward to reading the report of the Hearing in due course.
	DFID also regularly receives representations about the funding of the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) in connection with allegations that it supports population control. We are satisfied that the UNFPA does not support population control, but works to promote reproductive choice within its population programmes.

Rwanda

Edward Balls: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what proportion of UK aid to Rwanda has been directed to improving healthcare facilities in the last five years.

Hilary Benn: Although difficult to calculate, it is estimated that about 810 percent of all external aid to Rwanda in recent years has been allocated to health.
	The Government of Rwanda (GoR) attaches great importance to health in its Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (PRSP). The GoR Ministry of Health (MoH) has a strong national health strategic plan (20052009) which includes improvement of health care facilities. The health strategic plan is funded through the GoR budget, which is partly funded by general budget support (GBS) provided by donors. Health is also funded through donor support provided off-budget.
	The Government of Rwanda (GoR) budget allocation to health has increased substantially over the last five years. In 2003 total government expenditure allocated to the health sector was 4.4 percent. This increased to 8 percent. in 2005 and 8.4 percent. in 2006.
	
		Percentage
		
			  2002 2003 2004 
		
		
			 Proportion of general budget support as a percentage of external aid 40.09 37.18 (32)36.89 
			 Proportion of all external aid to health 7.76 9.92 (32)8.81 
			 GoR health expenditure (as percentage of GoR expenditure) allocated in budget. n/a 4.4 4.9 
		
	
	(32) Data for 2004 is programmed estimates.
	Notes:
	1. Data source for first two rows is Ministry of Finance, (Registry of External Aid to Rwanda, Volume 1, April 2004)
	2. A Public Expenditure Review (PER) is currently underway in health, which will provide more up to date data.
	3. Preliminary findings of a 2005 Ministry of Health donor mapping study shows a two fold increase in external aid to the health sector between 200405 (with an increase from approx 4080 million US$).

Tax Competition

Andrew George: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what assessment his Department has made of the impact of tax competition on developing countries.

Gareth Thomas: The Department for International Development's (DFID) second White Paper, Eliminating World Poverty: Making Globalisation Work for the Poor, December 2000, drew attention to the dangers for developing countries of tax competitionthe process whereby Governments offer ever more generous tax concessions (such as tax holidays) in an attempt to attract new investment.
	Tax competition can have harmful effects if it compromises Governments' ability to raise revenue to fund essential services.
	DFID has supported several international studies in this area (for example, by the World Bank and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development). While specific features of a tax regime may influence some investment decisions in some countries at some times, the general conclusion of this work is that selective tax incentives can unnecessarily reduce Government revenues while having little effect in attracting new investment. Consistent with this finding, DFID's policy work emphasises that developing countries should focus on improving the quality of their overall investment climates for domestic and foreign investors alike, rather than competing on taxes.

World Trade Organisation

John Barrett: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what discussions he has had with the European Commissioner for External Trade since the World Trade Organisation's trade talks in Hong Kong.

Gareth Thomas: Neither I nor my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for International Development have not had any direct discussions with the Trade Commissioner since Hong Kong. However, my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry has discussed the prospects for a successful conclusion to the current round of trade negotiations and how to achieve it.

Adult Education

Ashok Kumar: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how much funding has been allocated to adult education in (a) England, (b) the Tees Valley and (c) the area corresponding as closely as possible to Middlesbrough South and East Cleveland constituency in each year since 1997.

Bill Rammell: The Department allocates funds for the post-16 education and training sector to the Learning and Skills Council (LSC) working through 47 local offices. The LSC was established in 2001 bringing the planning and funding of post-16 education together under one body within a framework set by Government. In 200102 the LSC spent 2,236 million on adult programmes including further education, work based learning, adult and community learning and other programmes. This increased to 2,427 million in 200203 and to 2,866 million in 200304. These figures are available from the LSC's published accounts. Figures for adult education for the years prior to 2001 are not comparable as the budget was split between a range of different organisations. My Department does not hold figures for adult education funding at local or regional levels. Mark Haysom, the council's chief executive has written to the hon. Member and a copy of his reply has been placed in the House Library.
	Letter from Mark Haysom, dated 2 February 2006
	I write in response to your recent Parliamentary Question to the Secretary of State for Education and Skills referred to the Learning and Skills Council (LSC) by Bill Rammell regarding the funding allocated to adult education in (a) England, (b) the Tees Valley and (c) the area corresponding as closely as possible to Middlesbrough South and East Cleveland constituency in each year since 1997.
	Prior to the establishment of the Learning and Skills Council (LSC) in 2001 funding for further education in England was provided by the Further Education Funding Council (FEFC).
	The FEFC allocated funding to a different cohort of providers using a different funding methodology to the LSC and therefore it is not possible for us to provide information on the funding allocated for adult education between 1997 and 2001.
	I attach therefore a breakdown of the funding allocated by the LSC to FE providers in (a) England and (b) The Tees Valley from 2002/032005/06. It is not possible for us to provide figures for providers in the constituency areas you have requested because we do not have the detail of which providers are located with parliamentary constituencies. The figures show the total FE allocation for the academic year, the proportion of adult funding allocated and the percentage change.
	I hope you find this helpful.

A-levels

Claire Curtis-Thomas: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills 
	(1)  what guidance her Department issues to encourage more girls to undertake A Level science subjects;
	(2)  how many (a) girls and (b) boys undertook A Level physics in each of the last four years; what assessment she has made of the reasons for the difference in take up of such courses between boys and girls; and if she will make a statement.

Jacqui Smith: The Department has not issued guidance to encourage more girls to undertake A Level science subjects. Through the new programme of study for science at key stage 4 which will be introduced in September 2006, we will ensure the science taught in schools inspires learners to pursue further study.
	We are working closely with the Institute of Physics to consider what can be done in schools to change this, including the role that the Science Learning Centres can play.
	The following table shows GCE A level entries in physics by candidates aged 1618 in all schools and Further Education institutions 200205.
	
		Candidates attempting GCE A level Physics (34)
		
			  Number of candidates As a percentage of all GCE A level candidates 
		
		
			 Male   
			 2001/02 21,541 20.5 
			 2002/03 20,369 17.2 
			 2003/04 19,223 17.2 
			 2004/05 18,920 16.7 
			 Female   
			 2001/02 6,319 5.2 
			 2002/03 5,908 4.7 
			 2003/04 5,383 4.2 
			 2004/05 5,174 3.9 
		
	
	(34) Ages are taken at the start of the academic year i.e. 31 August.

Bologna Process

Tim Boswell: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what (a) secretariat and (b) follow-up resources her Department has provided toward implementation of commitments made under the Bologna Process.

Bill Rammell: The UK is responsible for providing a Secretariat to the Bologna Process from July 2005 until June 2007. The Secretariat is based in my department and consists of three officials including one from the Scottish Executive. Its purpose is to provide administrative and operational support for the Bologna Follow Up Group leading up to the next meeting of Bologna Ministers in London in May 2007. The Department is working closely with the devolved UK administrations and with the UK higher education sector to ensure effective implementation across the UK of commitments made under the Bologna Process.

Care Leavers

Edward Balls: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how many young people in (a) West Yorkshire and (b) Wakefield district who left care in 2005 stayed in (i) their own house, (ii) with friends and (iii) in hostel or bed-and-breakfast accommodation.

Maria Eagle: The Department will be releasing national and local authority level figures on looked-after children in a statistical volume on 30 March 2006. Figures for looked-after children aged 16 and over will be available on the Department's website http://www.dfes.gov.uk/rsgateway/DB/VOL/index.shtml National and local authority figures for all children looked after will be available after this date.
	I will write to the hon. Member and provide him with the information he has requested by 7 April 2006.

Class Sizes

Sharon Hodgson: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what the average class size is in (a) primary and (b) secondary schools in Gateshead, East and Washington, West constituency.

Jacqui Smith: The information requested has been placed in the Library.
	Data on class sizes at national, local authority and parliamentary constituency level can also be found at the following link: Schools and Pupils in England: January 2005 (Final) in the additional information sections 4, 6 and 7.

Communication Aids Project

Mike Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills 
	(1)  whether she plans to continue to support funding for communication equipment under the Communication Aids Project for (a) children and (b) adults; and if she will make a statement;
	(2)  what recent representations she has received about continued funding for the Communication Aids Project;
	(3)  what recent research she has (a) initiated and (b) evaluated on the need for communication aids equipment for (i) children and (ii) adults.

Maria Eagle: Funding for the Communication Aids Project comes to an end in March 2006. This DfES-funded initiative for school-age children has been successful but we have always made it clear, through the referral process and otherwise, that CAP was there to supplement, not replace, provision made locally. With other pressures on funding arising from the Government's ambitious agenda for education, it has not been possible to extend the funding for CAP.
	The Department has received a number of representations about funding for CAP, mainly approaches from hon. Members on behalf of constituents. These have been prompted either by the SCOPE Speak for Yourself campaign or a circular letter from the Manager of the ACE Centre North, one of the centres working within CAP.
	The Department has not recently initiated or evaluated any research on children who may require communication aids. We have, however, published an independent evaluation of the Communication Aids Project, work undertaken by University College London in conjunction with the University of York. The report was published in October 2004 as DfES Research Report 580 and it confirmed that CAP had positive benefits for the children being assisted and those working with them.
	Local service providers have a central role in meeting needs, including the needs of individuals with severely impaired communication. Where children are concerned, we would be looking to children's services, through children's trusts, to provide appropriate support and equipment to all disabled children. Adult needs would be met by local authorities and primary care trusts working together through their integrated community equipment services.
	Questions relating to research on adult needs, and funding associated with same, would be for my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Health. I understand there has been no recent research on adults needing communication aids. However, guidance on communication aids is available on the Department of Health's Care Service Improvement Partnership Integrating Community Equipment Services (ICES) website. Getting Started is intended to support local commissioning and provision of appropriate services.

Deaf Children

Nick Gibb: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how many and what proportion of deaf 11-year-olds achieved level 4 at Key Stage 2 in (a) reading, (b) writing and (c) mathematics in each year since 1996.

Maria Eagle: We cannot provide information relating specifically to deaf children. However, in 2004 information on type of Special Educational Need (SEN) was collected for the first time via the Pupil Level Annual School Census for those pupils at School Action Plus and with statements of SEN. The type of SEN indicator includes a category for those pupils with Hearing Impairment and information for the pupils who have Hearing Impairment listed as their primary SEN is provided in the following table. Other statemented and School Action Plus children who may have a hearing impairment but for whom this is not listed as their primary SEN are not included in this table.
	
		KS2 achievements for 11-year-old pupils(35) at School Action Plus and with statements of SEN, with hearing impairments as their Primary SEN, in all maintained schools, 2003/042004/05(36)
		
			  2004/05 2003/04 
		
		
			 Number of eligible 11-year-old pupils in Reading 1,493 970 
			 Number achieving level 4+ in Reading 913 478 
			 Percentage achieving level 4+ in Reading 61.2 49.3 
			
			 Number of eligible 11-year-old pupils in Writing 1,493 970 
			 Number achieving level 4+ in Writing 566 309 
			 Percentage achieving level 4+ in Writing 37.9 31.9 
			
			 Number of eligible 11-year-old pupils in Maths 1,510 975 
			 Number achieving level 4+ in Maths 795 426 
			 Percentage achieving level 4+ in Maths 52.6 43.7 
		
	
	(35) Number of KS2 eligible pupils with a valid result.
	(36) Including attempts and achievement in previous academic years.
	Note:
	Attainment data for 2004/05 are based on revised figures, for 2003/04 are based on final figures.

Deaf Children

Nick Gibb: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how many and what proportion of deaf 15 year-olds achieved five or more GCSEs or equivalent at grades (a) A* to C and (b) A* to G in each year since 1996.

Jacqui Smith: We cannot provide information relating specifically to deaf children. However, in 2004 information on type of special educational need (SEN) was collected for the first time via the pupil level annual school census for those pupils at school action plus and with statements of SEN. The type of SEN indicator includes a category for those pupils with hearing impairment and information for the pupils who have hearing impairment listed as their primary SEN is provided in the following table. Other statemented and school action plus children who may have a hearing impairment but for whom this is not listed as their primary SEN are not included in this table.
	
		GCSE and equivalent achievements for 15 year-old pupils(37) at school action plus and with statements of SEN, with hearing impairments as their primary SEN, in all maintained schools, 2003/042004/05(38)
		
			  2004/05 2003/04 
		
		
			 Number of 15 year-old pupils 1,108 1,008 
			 Number achieving 5+A*-C at GCSE and equivalents 364 310 
			 Percentage achieving 5+A*-C at GCSE and equivalents 32.9 30.8 
			 Number achieving 5+A*-G at GCSE and equivalents 847 792 
			 Percentage achieving 5+A*-G at GCSE and equivalents 76.4 78.6 
		
	
	(37) Number of pupils on roll aged 15 at the start of the academic year.
	(38) Including attempts and achievement in previous academic years.
	Note:
	Figures for 2004/05 are revised, figures for 2003/04 are revised as this is what was used in the Statistical First Release.

Departmental Staff

Vincent Cable: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how many people were employed by (a) her Department and (b) the Office for Standards in Education in each of the last 12 months for which information is available; and how many and what percentage of posts were vacant in each region in each month.

Maria Eagle: The figures requested are published in civil service statistics. I would refer the hon. Member to Table A which covers staff numbers (FTE and headcount basis) for each organisation. Civil service statistics are available in the Library and at the following address on the Cabinet Office statistics website: http://www.civilservice.gov.uk/management/statistics/index.asp
	The Department does not hold centrally details of vacant posts. This information could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.
	HM chief inspector, Maurice Smith, has written to the hon. Member in so far as the question relates to Ofsted, and a copy of his letter has been placed in the House Libraries.
	Letter from Maurice Smith, dated 13 February 2006
	Your recent parliamentary question has been passed to me, as Her Majesty's Chief Inspector, for reply.
	You asked how many people were employed by the Office of Standards in Education in each of the last 12 months for which information is available; and how many and what percentage of posts were vacant in each region in each month.
	Ofsted has undergone a substantial reorganisation over the last twelve months and moved towards a regional structure with a leaner HQ presence in London. In total, we have reduced the number of regional offices from 12 to 4. It is therefore not possible to provide an answer, by region or by month, as requested.
	Our establishment figure for 200405 was 2814 however our actual staffing did not reach this figure because we immediately implemented reductions once the Government's efficiency plans became clear. Ofsted does not operate an establishment figure now as we seek to manage by operational demand and budget rather than pre-determined staffing numbers, thus it is not possible to identify the number of posts vacant at this time.
	Our total full time equivalent staffing figure as of 31 December 2005 was 2280. The equivalent figure at 31 December 2004 was 2490.
	A copy of this reply has been sent to Maria Eagle and will be placed in the library of both Houses.

Education Provision (Hendon)

Andrew Dismore: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how many schools in Hendon had (a) computer suites and (b) classroom interactive whiteboards in (i) 2005 and (ii) 1997; and if she will make a statement.

Phil Hope: Data on ICT resources in schools is available nationally but not on a constituency or authority basis. In 2005, the average pupil to computer ratio was 6.7 pupils per computer in primary schools and 4.1 pupils per computer in secondary. There was no comparable survey in 1997, but in 1998 there were 17.6 pupils per computer in primary schools and 8.7 pupils per computer in secondary.
	In 2005, 76 per cent. of primary and 95 per cent. of secondary schools had interactive whiteboards. Data on interactive whiteboards (or equivalent technologies) was not collected in 1998 but in 2001, when data was first collected, 9 per cent. of primary and 40 per cent. of secondary schools had interactive whiteboards.

Educational Needs

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills if she will make a statement on the proposed pathfinder project to assist the identification of children whose needs could be met by appropriate boarding provision.

Maria Eagle: We made a commitment in the White Paper, Higher Standards, Better Schools for All, to work with a sample of local authorities and boarding schools to develop tools for identifying and assessing those children whose needs could best be met by appropriate boarding provision. These tools would then be embedded within the needs assessment and commissioning systems of the participating local authorities, who would apply to place children in vulnerable circumstances in one of the participating boarding schools, where a careful assessment of a child's individual needs indicated that this would be beneficial.
	The Department for Education and Skills hosted a conference on 20 January with some boarding schools and local authorities that has helped to highlight some of the issues that need to be addressed. The conference confirmed that there is certainly enough interest and support amongst schools and local authorities to continue to develop the policy. The Department is currently working up more detailed proposals for consultation with those boarding schools and authorities who are interested.

Educational Maintenance Allowance

David Drew: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what plans she has to ensure that those who are entitled to Educational Maintenance Allowance from April, but who do not live with parents or are of no fixed abode, continue to receive support to continue their studies, with particular reference to those who are not eligible for a bank account.

Maria Eagle: Education Maintenance Allowance (EMA) is not designed to provide support for a young person's living costs. It is an incentive to encourage learning post compulsory education.
	Where a young person in full time non advanced education is estranged from their parent or guardian, income support is available (subject to satisfying the other qualifying conditions). EMA is paid in addition to income support in these circumstances.
	In response to its stakeholder consultation, the Learning and Skills Council (LSC), who have operational responsibility for EMA, has been supporting learners to open bank accounts. LSC have been working with the British Bankers Association (BBA) to publicise basic bank accounts. These bank accounts are easier to obtain than a full current account. The BBA has also agreed to act as an intermediary if learners experience specific problems.

Ethnic Pupils

Sadiq Khan: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what research she has conducted into under-achievement in schools by ethnic minority pupils.

Jacqui Smith: The Department has an active research and analysis programme on the attainment of pupils from minority ethnic backgrounds. In addition to our annual publication on the attainment of pupils by ethnicity across the Key Stages we have published a series of topic papers on minority ethnic pupils and education, the most recent of which was published in January 2005. These include statistics and research on the attainment of under-achieving minority ethnic groups. current and recently completed research projects include an evaluation of the Aiming High: Raising the Achievement of African-Caribbean Pupils project and an analysis of the attainment of minority ethnic pupils in Excellence in Cities areas. All of the Department's research on minority ethnic pupils can be accessed from www.dfes.gov.uk/research

Ethnic Pupils

Lynne Featherstone: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what steps the Government are taking to monitor the collective achievement and progress of pupils with (a) Turkish and (b) other ethnic backgrounds that are not Census ethnic group categories; and if she will make a statement.

Jacqui Smith: Data from the Annual Schools Census, linked to the national pupil data base, allows the Department to collect and analyse on an annual basis on the achievement of pupils by ethnic group. Data on pupils' ethnicity is currently collected using the codes from the national population Census. The any other white background category includes Turkish pupils. However, Turkish as a separate ethnic code is included in an extended list which contains 70 additional categories which can be used by schools and local authorities to meet their local data collection needs.
	From 2007 schools and authorities will be able to collect information on pupils' languages by selecting from an extensive list. This will help with the planning of inclusion and equality strategies, at both national and local level. Turkish will be one of the languages that will be available to record from 2007.

Free School Meals

Vincent Cable: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what analysis she has made of the reasons for failure to take up entitlement to free school meals.

Jacqui Smith: The Department is aware that there is a gap between eligibility and take up of free school meals and has funded research commissioned by the Child Poverty Action Group into the reasons children fail to take up their free school meal entitlement. The findings were published in a report entitled Improving the Take-Up of Free School Meals in May 2001. The report shows that pupils and parents considered that the quality and choice of food on offer can discourage take up.

Higher Education

Lynne Jones: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how many students who entered higher education in each year since 1996 went to universities that are members of (a) the Russell Group, (b) the 1994 Group and (c) the Coalition of Modern Universities; and what proportion in each category were from each socioeconomic group.

Bill Rammell: Information on the social background of entrants to higher education is published annually by the Higher Education Statistics Agency (HESA) in Performance Indicators in Higher Education. For every higher education institution in the UK, the figures show the numbers and proportions of young, full-time entrants to first degree courses from social classes HIM, IV and V (for 2001/02 and earlier) and socio-economic groups 4, 5, 6 and 7 (from 2002/03). This gives a partial picture due to the exclusion of entrants to other undergraduate courses, part-time and mature students from the figures. The aggregate figures for the various institutional groupings are summarised in the table.
	
		Young entrants to full-time first degree courses 1997/98 to2001/02
		
			 Total young entrants Russell Group 1994 group CMU All HEIs 
		
		
			 1997/98 50,205 17,610 57,135 216,210 
			 1998/99 51,610 17,640 57,575 216,130 
			 1999/2000 53,110 18,250 57,215 219,790 
			 2000/01 53,265 19,045 55,670 221,140 
			 2001/02 56,885 20,500 56,360 229,750 
			 of which: 
			 Percentage from social classes HIM, IV, V(69) 
			 1997/98 15.8 16.6 33.3 25.0 
			 1998/99 15.6 17.4 33.2 25.0 
			 1999/2000 16.0 17.2 33.7 25.3 
			 2000/01 16.5 17.7 33.7 25.4 
			 2001/02 16.4 17.5 34.6 25.8 
		
	
	(69) The percentages are based on students who provided details of their background, and exclude non-respondents. Social classes HIM, IV and V cover students from skilled manual, semi-skilled and unskilled backgrounds.
	Note:
	Numbers are rounded to the nearest 5 and percentages are rounded to 1 decimal place.
	Source:
	HESA
	
		Young entrants to full-time first degree courses 2002/03 to2003/04
		
			 Total young entrants Russell Group 1994 group CMU All HEIs 
		
		
			 2002/03 58,480 21,890 56,945 239,180 
			 2003/04 61,370 22,355 56,755 241,445 
			 of which: 
			 From socio-economic groups 47(70) 
			 2002/03 19.1 19.1 36.7 28.4 
			 2003/04 19.0 20.3 36.7 28.6 
		
	
	(70) The percentages are based on students who provided details of their background, and exclude non-respondents. National Statistics socio-economic classifications (NS-SEC) 47 cover students from small employers and own account workers, lower supervisory and technical, semi-routine and routine occupational backgrounds.
	Note:
	Numbers are rounded to the nearest 5 and percentages are rounded to 1 decimal place.
	Source:
	HESA

Home-School Agreements

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills if she will list the maintained schools in each local education authority which do not give information on pupils' progress to parents at least three times a year.

Jacqui Smith: The Department does not collect information on how frequently maintained schools give information on pupils' progress to parents.
	There is currently a legal requirement for maintained schools to provide a written pupil report to parents once a year and an opportunity for face-to-face discussion of that report with the pupil's teacher.
	The White Paper, Higher Standards, Better Schools For All, sets out our plans for providing information to parents. We want all schools to provide information to parents on the progress of their child at least three times a year with regular opportunities to discuss with teachers how they can support their child's learning.

Industrial Design Courses

Claire Curtis-Thomas: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills if she will list the universities which provide industrial design-related programmes; and how many are (a) undergraduate programmes and (b) specifically industrial design courses.

Bill Rammell: The latest available information covers academic year 200607, and is taken from the UCAS website. This covers full-time first degree, HND and foundation degree courses only. Comparable information for part-time undergraduate courses, and postgraduate courses, are not available centrally.
	Institutions offering Industrial Design courses 1 in 2006/07:
	Basingstoke College of Technology
	Bedford College
	The University of Bolton
	Bournemouth University
	The University of Bradford
	University of Brighton
	University of the West of England, Bristol
	Brunei University
	University of Wales Institute, Cardiff
	Carmarthenshire College
	University of Central England in Birmingham
	University of Central Lancashire
	Coventry University
	De Montfort University
	University of Dundee
	University of Glamorgan
	Great Yarmouth College
	University of Hertfordshire
	Hopwood Hall College
	Kent Institute of Art and Design
	Kingston University
	University of Lincoln
	London South Bank University
	Loughborough University
	University of Luton
	Middlesex University
	The North East Wales Institute of Higher Education
	Northumbria University
	Nottingham Trent University
	University of Plymouth
	Plymouth College of Art and Design
	The Robert Gordon University
	The University of Salford
	Sheffield Hallam University
	South Nottingham College
	Staffordshire University
	The Surrey Institute of Art and Design, University College
	Swansea Institute of Higher Education
	University of Teesside
	University of the Arts London
	University of Wolverhampton
	1 Listed as industrial design on the UCAS course search website.
	Source:
	UCAS website course search

Local Education Authority Funding

Graham Stuart: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how much each local education authority in England has received in each year since 1997.

Jacqui Smith: The information requested is contained within the table as follows:
	
		Total funding for pupils aged 319  million
		
			 LEA name 199798 199899 19992000 200001 200102 200203 200304 200405 200506 
		
		
			 Barking and Dagenham 87.0 92.6 97.8 107.6 115.7 122.0 131.1 138.7 143.2 
			 Barnet 144.4 149.8 157.9 168.4 180.9 189.6 199.4 206.7 212.2 
			 Barnsley 94.0 97.6 102.9 111.3 116.6 120.4 128.3 133.0 137.2 
			 Bath and North East Somerset 66.1 69.2 73.3 79.8 83.5 85.8 90.1 94.0 98.9 
			 Bedfordshire 174.1 179.6 188.1 206.5 220.6 230.7 238.5 248.2 258.6 
			 Bexley 110.5 116.6 122.1 133.4 143.1 148.5 151.8 158.6 165.1 
			 Birmingham 542.6 562.1 595.7 654.7 690.0 709.3 745.0 772.4 812.6 
			 Blackburn with Darwen 76.7 80.0 85.4 92.5 96.7 98.4 105.3 108.8 113.3 
			 Blackpool 54.5 58.2 62.6 70.1 73.9 77.6 82.9 86.0 89.3 
			 Bolton 124.7 130.0 138.1 151.5 156.9 162.1 168.4 175.7 186.0 
			 Bournemouth 60.4 61.9 64.9 71.6 74.5 76.0 77.6 80.2 82.5 
			 Bracknell Forest 45.0 46.8 48.6 52.3 54.3 55.6 57.9 60.4 63.6 
			 Bradford 255.4 261.8 277.6 306.2 323.3 330.4 341.8 354.3 371.2 
			 Brent 133.8 136.3 143.5 154.3 163.6 171.8 188.0 196.4 205.9 
			 Brighton and Hove 87.7 91.7 97.9 109.2 115.5 118.3 121.3 125.3 127.4 
			 Bristol, City of 144.8 149.0 156.5 172.8 180.8 184.4 192.9 195.5 204.2 
			 Bromley 131.2 139.0 147.1 160.9 172.6 180.7 189.2 198.3 206.5 
			 Buckinghamshire 209.3 216.0 228.2 247.3 264.1 275.3 287.5 302.4 315.1 
			 Bury 75.5 79.6 84.0 91.1 95.3 96.9 102.7 107.7 110.9 
			 Calderdale 94.1 97.1 104.2 113.7 119.3 123.8 130.5 136.5 142.9 
			 Cambridgeshire 202.7 210.6 223.9 243.9 255.6 263.9 282.9 297.9 310.2 
			 Camden 96.9 98.0 104.3 114.3 119.2 125.4 123.2 130.3 133.8 
			 Cheshire 283.0 295.3 307.5 333.2 349.3 360.0 379.5 394.5 409.8 
			 Cornwall 199.6 210.2 222.7 244.2 254.4 262.8 271.4 282.6 293.3 
			 Coventry 145.6 152.8 160.8 174.7 181.0 187.2 194.4 201.2 210.3 
			 Croydon 147.8 155.1 164.5 180.5 191.5 199.1 206.2 216.7 221.9 
			 Cumbria 204.8 216.7 228.3 251.4 263.8 271.3 285.7 298.1 309.2 
			 Darlington 42.2 43.9 46.6 51.2 53.9 55.0 58.0 60.6 62.8 
			 Derby 103.1 107.9 114.9 125.0 132.4 135.7 143.2 149.8 155.3 
			 Derbyshire 290.2 301.8 318.9 352.1 373.9 387.5 407.0 424.5 442.8 
			 Devon 257.4 271.9 287.0 311.7 327.0 342.4 359.1 372.4 389.5 
			 Doncaster 145.6 151.1 157.8 170.1 177.8 183.4 195.9 201.7 204.3 
			 Dorset 143.0 149.2 158.6 174.8 184.6 193.4 202.8 212.4 220.1 
			 Dudley 124.6 132.9 140.3 152.1 160.2 165.6 174.0 181.5 192.9 
			 Durham 219.5 227.0 238.1 258.8 272.8 277.2 288.8 298.7 311.5 
			 Ealing 135.6 143.0 151.2 165.3 176.1 181.1 193.7 199.3 208.4 
			 East Riding of Yorkshire 127.1 133.7 142.1 156.9 164.6 172.6 180.1 187.2 194.6 
			 East Sussex 184.5 192.8 204.5 225.5 239.8 249.3 258.5 271.2 278.3 
			 Enfield 147.0 152.8 161.8 175.2 190.4 201.2 209.5 221.5 229.1 
			 Essex 556.9 580.2 611.6 667.3 711.8 740.1 775.0 810.0 834.5 
			 Gateshead 83.0 87.6 92.0 102.1 107.4 109.3 114.7 117.9 121.0 
			 Gloucestershire 227.5 237.3 252.4 279.4 293.7 304.6 318.1 329.3 343.6 
			 Greenwich 136.8 140.3 148.8 164.2 170.5 178.3 186.4 194.7 200.8 
			 Hackney 114.7 115.7 124.8 135.8 141.8 147.7 155.6 161.9 172.3 
			 Halton 65.2 66.6 69.2 75.6 79.3 79.7 82.8 85.2 86.8 
			 Hammersmith and Fulham 68.3 69.9 74.3 83.0 90.0 94.9 98.0 103.0 104.0 
			 Hampshire 475.4 494.8 520.2 565.8 604.1 623.8 644.7 668.2 686.0 
			 Haringey 117.5 120.6 131.9 145.9 155.7 163.3 165.4 176.1 178.8 
			 Harrow 88.1 90.5 93.9 102.4 108.3 112.3 119.0 124.0 129.5 
			 Hartlepool 45.1 47.2 49.6 54.4 57.3 58.4 62.7 64.5 67.1 
			 Havering 105.9 110.2 113.8 124.2 133.9 137.1 142.0 148.9 153.0 
			 Herefordshire 64.7 68.3 73.0 79.9 83.9 87.3 92.6 96.0 99.0 
			 Hertfordshire 474.7 494.4 518.2 563.4 599.3 625.0 647.5 677.6 693.9 
			 Hillingdon 114.9 119.2 125.8 137.5 148.4 155.6 167.3 176.1 183.4 
			 Hounslow 116.6 118.4 124.9 135.2 143.8 150.2 159.8 166.2 173.1 
			 Isle of Wight 56.6 60.0 62.5 70.1 74.1 76.8 78.4 81.4 84.3 
			 Islington 99.0 102.3 108.4 120.7 126.5 128.9 134.3 139.2 143.1 
			 Kensington and Chelsea 42.2 44.0 47.4 53.0 56.6 60.6 63.9 67.5 69.3 
			 Kent 585.3 613.9 645.2 707.0 756.2 790.9 827.1 874.5 896.1 
			 Kingston Upon Hull, City of 124.7 128.1 134.3 147.7 153.8 157.0 162.3 165.6 169.1 
			 Kingston upon Thames 57.6 59.1 61.9 67.3 72.3 76.4 81.0 86.2 91.3 
			 Kirklees 176.2 183.0 194.1 212.2 222.3 228.7 241.4 252.7 261.0 
			 Knowsley 91.1 94.4 99.2 109.2 115.6 116.9 118.3 119.4 119.1 
			 Lambeth 118.8 122.7 133.4 145.2 152.6 158.2 166.5 174.1 178.4 
			 Lancashire 497.5 521.2 549.9 600.9 627.8 640.3 657.3 683.9 706.6 
			 Leeds 312.9 324.5 343.2 378.1 398.5 408.9 425.3 437.8 451.0 
			 Leicester 148.1 151.9 160.4 171.9 177.7 183.1 193.7 199.8 206.5 
			 Leicestershire 244.0 253.6 268.4 292.6 311.9 325.8 338.8 354.2 366.4 
			 Lewisham 134.5 140.6 149.3 164.7 173.7 178.4 186.7 193.2 197.0 
			 Lincolnshire 262.1 273.5 291.5 319.4 341.5 358.3 380.3 401.0 420.3 
			 Liverpool 256.4 267.1 278.2 307.3 319.1 325.2 330.4 336.7 338.7 
			 Luton 95.9 97.0 103.1 112.3 118.8 124.6 131.6 137.0 141.3 
			 Manchester 223.1 231.2 245.7 271.5 282.6 289.1 297.0 302.2 310.3 
			 Medway 126.9 130.0 138.0 152.8 161.8 166.9 170.7 177.5 181.1 
			 Merton 71.8 73.5 77.0 82.2 86.9 87.5 93.2 97.6 103.6 
			 Middlesbrough 74.3 76.9 80.8 86.7 90.4 90.8 89.6 87.6 90.4 
			 Milton Keynes 102.3 103.8 108.5 116.8 124.2 130.4 138.6 149.1 156.9 
			 Newcastle upon Tyne 124.3 125.7 131.0 142.0 149.6 153.4 158.8 161.7 166.1 
			 Newham 163.7 171.3 183.1 203.7 219.0 229.1 241.1 249.5 258.0 
			 Norfolk 306.2 316.3 336.0 368.4 392.2 407.9 422.0 441.8 458.1 
			 North East Lincolnshire 78.9 82.1 86.2 94.6 98.8 100.0 102.8 105.2 107.7 
			 North Lincolnshire 69.3 72.9 76.6 83.5 86.6 88.1 92.5 96.1 99.5 
			 North Somerset 73.0 76.2 80.6 86.7 91.2 94.9 100.5 105.5 111.2 
			 North Tyneside 84.0 86.8 90.3 99.5 105.1 109.5 115.3 118.3 121.2 
			 North Yorkshire 229.9 241.8 257.2 283.6 300.3 311.3 327.1 338.1 349.5 
			 Northamptonshire 273.1 284.6 301.7 328.1 346.0 357.2 382.6 396.1 408.8 
			 Northumberland 140.6 144.1 150.7 164.2 173.9 178.9 187.0 194.7 203.5 
			 Nottingham 137.7 130.0 138.8 150.3 156.8 160.1 166.8 170.4 176.0 
			 Nottinghamshire 308.8 326.9 343.8 376.0 392.9 404.7 422.8 437.6 452.7 
			 Oldham 116.7 120.3 128.2 138.2 144.5 150.3 157.0 163.0 171.4 
			 Oxfordshire 237.0 246.0 257.0 279.8 297.8 309.9 322.0 337.7 347.3 
			 Peterborough 86.7 89.6 92.9 100.9 105.8 110.4 116.9 121.9 127.3 
			 Plymouth 118.1 120.9 127.5 138.9 142.3 147.3 150.9 155.5 161.1 
			 Poole 54.0 55.1 58.1 62.7 65.7 68.2 70.1 72.1 74.9 
			 Portsmouth 76.5 80.3 84.6 93.5 98.3 100.7 102.4 104.7 105.6 
			 Reading 50.3 53.3 56.7 62.0 63.9 66.7 69.6 72.0 75.3 
			 Redbridge 122.8 128.2 137.3 150.4 160.3 167.8 174.3 183.9 190.9 
			 Redcar and Cleveland 71.5 73.9 76.8 83.2 87.6 88.9 93.3 96.0 97.7 
			 Richmond upon Thames 57.1 58.4 61.2 65.8 69.8 71.7 75.0 78.9 83.1 
			 Rochdale 102.4 107.1 114.0 126.0 131.6 137.2 142.7 147.6 153.4 
			 Rotherham 125.3 128.1 137.0 151.6 159.8 163.5 174.3 179.7 184.9 
			 Rutland 13.0 13.2 13.9 15.0 16.3 16.8 17.9 18.9 20.0 
			 Salford 101.4 106.3 112.2 124.2 130.7 131.4 134.7 138.7 141.0 
			 Sandwell 145.0 152.0 159.3 170.7 179.5 184.5 195.3 203.1 212.2 
			 Sefton 130.2 135.6 141.8 155.6 164.1 168.9 177.4 181.3 186.3 
			 Sheffield 207.5 216.0 232.4 259.9 274.1 282.7 295.7 304.8 313.5 
			 Shropshire 108.6 112.4 118.6 128.6 136.5 141.9 150.4 155.8 160.6 
			 Slough 61.2 65.1 69.3 75.6 80.5 84.4 88.3 92.8 95.9 
			 Solihull 92.1 97.0 102.3 111.5 117.1 119.5 126.9 130.8 134.7 
			 Somerset 185.2 193.8 206.1 227.0 241.0 250.1 261.8 273.7 282.5 
			 South Gloucestershire 98.0 103.4 110.6 119.9 127.1 132.9 141.4 146.6 152.9 
			 South Tyneside 73.4 76.9 80.8 88.2 93.1 94.1 98.6 99.8 102.1 
			 Southampton 91.2 96.2 101.5 110.9 116.4 117.5 120.1 125.7 125.7 
			 Southend-on-Sea 72.5 76.1 80.2 88.6 95.2 100.8 104.8 111.1 115.4 
			 Southwark 131.9 136.0 146.1 160.3 171.9 181.7 190.3 194.6 205.6 
			 St. Helens 82.2 85.6 88.5 97.4 104.3 106.6 112.4 115.4 117.9 
			 Staffordshire 343.1 356.1 374.2 404.5 421.9 433.8 456.4 472.7 487.5 
			 Stockport 110.9 116.6 122.3 133.6 138.5 140.8 147.7 151.9 155.5 
			 Stockton-on-Tees 87.8 90.2 96.0 105.7 111.5 113.8 119.3 122.2 124.1 
			 Stoke-on-Trent 107.2 111.5 116.2 127.7 134.7 138.1 145.7 150.3 154.7 
			 Suffolk 270.3 278.1 290.1 318.4 337.0 350.1 363.8 380.0 392.0 
			 Sunderland 139.5 143.8 149.5 162.4 170.9 173.7 181.6 188.0 188.4 
			 Surrey 380.1 397.2 418.7 456.4 487.4 503.5 524.5 550.2 574.4 
			 Sutton 83.4 86.5 91.0 99.4 107.3 113.8 120.7 129.6 134.3 
			 Swindon 77.0 79.9 85.8 93.2 97.1 99.2 105.0 108.4 113.6 
			 Tameside 101.2 105.4 111.7 121.3 127.6 130.7 136.0 141.5 145.4 
			 Telford and Wrekin 70.4 73.2 78.0 86.6 91.9 94.1 98.3 102.9 106.6 
			 Thurrock 63.3 66.2 70.4 76.9 81.8 85.0 89.1 95.0 97.8 
			 Torbay 52.8 54.6 58.1 63.2 65.6 68.7 71.1 74.4 77.2 
			 Tower Hamlets 152.5 159.9 174.2 186.9 198.3 205.8 214.1 223.6 235.7 
			 Trafford 96.2 99.3 106.3 115.4 120.9 122.6 128.3 132.5 137.8 
			 Wakefield 137.9 143.0 151.0 165.7 173.5 178.2 186.4 192.1 202.9 
			 Walsall 133.4 137.2 146.0 158.2 164.7 170.2 178.1 184.7 195.5 
			 Waltham Forest 118.0 121.0 130.7 143.1 153.7 159.9 165.2 172.0 175.8 
			 Wandsworth 108.3 109.8 118.1 127.3 134.0 135.9 146.4 154.0 160.0 
			 Warrington 83.7 88.1 91.4 100.2 105.2 108.0 112.1 114.9 120.0 
			 Warwickshire 198.7 208.5 220.6 239.2 252.0 262.5 279.6 290.8 301.3 
			 West Berkshire 64.3 67.9 71.6 79.1 83.9 87.6 93.3 98.0 104.2 
			 West Sussex 289.9 301.5 314.6 341.8 365.1 381.7 396.4 415.1 427.0 
			 Westminster 72.3 73.6 79.9 87.9 92.0 97.5 104.9 110.7 115.1 
			 Wigan 135.0 140.2 147.3 160.5 167.8 170.4 179.1 185.5 191.7 
			 Wiltshire 168.8 176.7 187.6 204.9 216.8 226.3 240.8 251.0 263.7 
			 Windsor and Maidenhead 54.9 57.6 60.2 65.4 69.6 72.3 75.5 79.0 82.8 
			 Wirral 157.7 165.6 173.2 189.6 199.7 206.2 213.6 217.3 222.4 
			 Wokingham 62.5 65.6 68.6 74.4 78.8 81.4 87.9 91.1 95.8 
			 Wolverhampton 120.5 123.9 132.0 143.5 150.3 157.8 164.5 169.8 175.3 
			 Worcestershire 217.0 221.3 232.0 253.2 266.2 274.6 284.2 297.2 310.3 
			 York 64.4 67.1 71.1 78.8 82.5 84.2 86.1 88.6 91.9 
		
	
	Notes:
	1. Data reported using Real terms figures at 200405 prices, based on GDP deflators as at 23 December 2005.
	2. Figures reflect relevant sub-blocks of Standard Spending Assessment / Education Formula Spending (EFS) settlements and exclude the pensions transfer to EFS and LSC.
	3. Total funding also includes all revenue grants in DfES Departmental Expenditure Limits relevant to pupils aged 319 and exclude Education Maintenance Allowances (EMAs) and grants not allocated at LEA level. For those authorities in receipt of advance of grant under the transitional support arrangements for 200405, advance grant funding is included in the year of payment (200405). There will be a consequential reduction in DfES grant for these LEAs in future years (either 200607 and 200708 or 200607 to 200809, depending on the terms on which the advance was given to the LEA).
	4. Where responsibility for funding a school has transferred from an authority, related funding no longer appears in the series.
	5. Figures are rounded to the nearest 0.1 million.
	6. 199798 figures for authorities subject to Local Government Reorganisation in that year have been estimated, pro-rata to their post LGR figures.

Learning and Skills Council

Brian Jenkins: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what discussions she has had on the future of the Learning and Skills Council in Tamworth; and if she will make a statement;

Jim Cunningham: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what discussions she has had on the future of the Learning and Skills Council in Coventry; and if she will make a statement.

Bill Rammell: The LSC is embarking upon a major transformation programme that will make it a smaller, more dynamic and more customer-focused organisation. This will build upon its existing strengths; further develop its relationships with providers and with its partners, and help push the highest proportion of its funding out through colleges and providers into front line delivery. At local level, the LSC will develop small teams of professional staff who will support the delivery of its priority objectives through strategic relationships with colleges, providers and other key stakeholders and so ensure that the needs of local employers and learners are met. I fully support the changes the LSC is making as I believe it will help bring about an organisation that is fit for purpose.
	The LSC continues to consult widely on the detail of the restructuring proposals. The effects on organisation and staffing are matters for the LSC. Mark Haysom, the LSC's chief executive, has written to my hon. Friend with further information. And a copy of his reply has been placed in the House Library.
	Letter from Mark Haysom dated 14 February 2006
	I write in response to your Parliamentary Question on the future of the Learning and Skills Council in Coventry.
	As we have previously discussed the LSC has embarked on our agenda for change this is a radical and transformational programme of six themes to change the further education sector to better meet the needs of employers, to continue to raise quality of provision, simplify funding, share data collection, build business excellence within the sector, and to build the sector's reputation.
	If we are to do this, the LSC must change too. We have introduced a seventh theme of transformation of the LSC itself, strengthening our ability to work locally, while sharing a number of common functions at the regional level. I believe that we can achieve this at a cost saving of approximately 40m and with around 1,300 fewer posts.
	Across the country there will be some 183 local partnership and economic development teams. These teams of highly skilled and experienced education and training professionals will be responsible for developing strategic relationships with colleges, schools and training providers and with our key local stakeholders.
	To support them, we will provide more efficient and effective services at regional level. Building on our experience of regional working to date, we want to create centres in each region from which operational services will be delivered. We will also strengthen the regional level in order that we can respond to regional skills priorities.
	With a stronger regional tier, we have the opportunity to reduce the size of out National Office, We will only do nationally that which must be done nationally-for example, building relationships with national stakeholders and providing clear frameworks to ensure consistency across the LSC.
	These changes will mean that for the Coventry and Warwickshire LSC area we will have approximately 27 people working in two local partnership teams-one for Coventry and one for Warwickshire-and a single economic development team. The new arrangements will provide a closer working relationship between the employers, the LSC, colleges and providers, and other local stakeholders, making the system more responsive to local needs and better able to work for the local community.
	Please do not hesitate to contact me if there is any further information you require.

Learning and Skills Council

John Denham: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what the (a) allocated and (b) actual Learning and Skills Council funding distributed to each relevant educational institution in (i) Hampshire, (ii) Southampton, (iii) Portsmouth and (iv) the Isle of Wight has been in each of the last four years, broken down by (a) 16 to 18 and (b) 19 plus age groups.

Bill Rammell: My Department allocates funds for the post-16 education and training sector to the Learning and Skills Council (LSC) working through 47 local offices. The LSC was established in 2001 bringing the planning and funding of post-16 education together under one body within a framework set by Government.
	On 21 October the Government set out its priorities for post-16 education and training. I set out the Government's priorities for the learning and skills sector and the impact on funding in 200607 and 200708. Full details can be found in Priorities for Success' on the LSC's website. In 200405 the LSC spent 9.2 billion in total on delivering post-16 education and training.
	The Department does not hold figures for post-16 education funding at local level. Some of the information you require is available on the LSC's website. I am therefore copying this letter to Mark Haysom, the Council's Chief Executive so that he can respond with the detailed information you have requested. A copy of his reply will be placed in the Library.

Learning Mentors

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how many learning mentors there are in each local education authority.

Jacqui Smith: Learning mentors are one of the strands of the Excellence in Cities (EiC) and Excellence Clusters (EC) initiative. Data relating to the numbers of learning mentors is not collected centrally but figures collected from local sources are shown in the following table. The Department does not hold figures of the numbers of learning mentors outside of this project.
	
		
			 Excellence in Cities Number 
		
		
			 Barking and Dagenham 58 
			 Barnsley 70 
			 Birmingham 623 
			 Blackburn with Darwen 70 
			 Blackpool 65 
			 Bradford 302 
			 Brent 38 
			 Bristol 97 
			 Camden 69 
			 Darlington 41 
			 Doncaster 122 
			 Ealing 44 
			 Enfield 74 
			 Gateshead 30 
			 Greenwich 114 
			 Hackney 89 
			 Halton 66 
			 Hammersmith and Fulham 62 
			 Haringey 76 
			 Hartlepool 28 
			 Hillingdon 41 
			 Hounslow 49 
			 Islington 74 
			 Kensington/Chelsea/Westminster 78 
			 Kingston Upon Hull 86 
			 Knowsley 86 
			 Lambeth 84 
			 Leeds 473 
			 Leicester 94 
			 Lewisham 102 
			 Liverpool 199 
			 Manchester 192 
			 Middlesbrough 70 
			 Newcastle Upon Tyne 68 
			 Newham 133 
			 North Sefton 34 
			 North Tyneside 80 
			 Nottingham 128 
			 Oldham 137 
			 Peterborough 88 
			 Rochdale 98 
			 Rotherham 166 
			 Salford 119 
			 Sandwell 138 
			 Sefton 32 
			 Sheffield 178 
			 South Tyneside 39 
			 Southwark 114 
			 St. Helens 56 
			 Stockton 47 
			 Stoke On Trent 165 
			 Sunderland 90 
			 Telford and Wrekin 28 
			 Tower Hamlets 109 
			 Waltham Forest 90 
			 Wandsworth 78 
			 Wirral 61 
			   
			 Excellence Clusters  
			 Kent 26 
			 Barnet 49 
			 Cumbria 14 
			 Bedfordshire 28 
			 Bexley 40 
			 County Durham 27 
			 Bolton 47 
			 Lincolnshire 106 
			 Somerset 8 
			 Brighton and Hove 37 
			 Bromley 32 
			 Bury 41 
			 Calderdale 24 
			 Derbyshire 31 
			 Northamptonshire 44 
			 Conventry 68 
			 Cheshire 41 
			 Croydon 57 
			 Derby City 94 
			 Dudley 28 
			 Co. Durham 32 
			 Lancashire 20 
			 Cheshire 37 
			 Gloucestershire 54 
			 Kent 32 
			 Norfolk 12 
			 Ne Lincs 50 
			 Hampshire 40 
			 Essex 29 
			 Harrow 20 
			 East Sussex 35 
			 Herefordshire 18 
			 Buckinghamshire 33 
			 Kent 41 
			 Kirklees 89 
			 Lancashire 353 
			 Luton 56 
			 Kent 24 
			 Medway 17 
			 Milton Keynes 47 
			 Oxfordshire 21 
			 Plymouth 17.4 
			 Portsmouth 59 
			 Reading 8 
			 Redcar and Cleavland 79.5 
			 North Lincolnshire 18 
			 Shropshire 32 
			 Slough 48 
			 Solihull 63 
			 Southend On Sea 30 
			 Swindon 27 
			 Tameside 57 
			 Thurrock 16 
			 Trafford 28 
			 Wakefield 100 
			 Walsall 42 
			 Cumbaria 48 
			 Lancashire 21 
			 West Sussex 31 
			 North Somerset 32 
			 Wigan 25 
			 Wolverhampton 78

Lisbon Agenda

Keith Vaz: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what policies her Department has adopted to assist the United Kingdom's fulfilment of the Lisbon Agenda criteria.

Bill Rammell: The Government strongly supports the renewed Lisbon focus on jobs and growth as the best way to meet the challenges of globalisation and boost prosperity and living standards for all. The UK national reform programme details our policy response to these challenges.
	We expect the spring council in March to emphasise the importance of implementation of national commitments to reform.

London Academy, Edgware

Andrew Dismore: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what assessment she has made of the academic results of the London Academy, Edgware since it became a city academy; and if she will make a statement.

Jacqui Smith: The London Academy opened in September 2004 and has already made excellent progress in improving educational opportunities for young people in the Barnet area. The proportion of pupils gaining 5 or more good GCSEs increased in 2005 to 48 per cent. up nine percentage points from the 39 per cent. achieved in the last year of the predecessor school.
	Ofsted have recently made a monitoring visit to London Academy and reported that Pupils' rapid progress is a testimony to the positive ethos for learning. The Academy has risen to the top five per cent of schools nationally for progress for 11 to 14 year olds, and the top three per cent for 14 to 16 year olds.
	This is a particularly impressive achievement given that the Academy serves some of the most socially deprived wards in the country. Over 45 per cent. of the pupils in Years 7 to 10 are entitled to free school meals, increasing to 57 per cent. in Year 11; over half of the pupils are from minority ethnic groups; well over a third of the pupils have a language other than English; and a similar percentage have a special educational need. The Academy is also a local authority-designated base for 30 pupils with speech and communication difficulties.

Looked-after Children

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills if she will make a statement on the proposed consultation on proposals for transforming outcomes for looked-after children.

Maria Eagle: We announced in the Schools White Paper, Higher Standards, Better Schools for All that we would be consulting on a wide-ranging set of proposals for transforming outcomes for looked-after children. We are currently developing these proposals, including taking views from a range of stakeholders on the nature of the problem. We expect to publish the document for wide consultation within the next few months.

National Academy for Gifted and Talented Youth

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what the expenditure of the National Academy for Gifted and Talented Youth was in each year since 1999.

Jacqui Smith: The National Academy for Gifted and Talented Youth was established in 2002; its annual expenditure is set out in the following table. The figures represent 100 per cent. expenditure against the Department's annual core grant to the National Academy for Gifted and Talented Youth, plus philanthropic and other income provided through private sponsorship. The 200506 figures are projected spend based on latest figures available.
	
		Annual expenditure for the National Academy for Gifted and Talented Youth 
		
			  200203 200304 200405 200506 
		
		
			 DfES Core Grant 1,500,000 3,000,000 4,750,000 4,750,000 
			 Philanthropic and other  income 374,391 419,554 808,256 1,220,000 
			 Total 1,874,391 3,419,554 5,558,256 5,970,000

Personalised Learning (Barnet)

Andrew Dismore: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what allocation the London borough of Barnet has received for personalised learning from the dedicated schools grant since its introduction; and if she will make a statement.

Jacqui Smith: The Dedicated Schools Grant (DSG) is being introduced from 200607. The data I placed in the Library to accompany my written statement of 7 December 2005 on the School Funding Settlement for 200607 and 200708, sets out how much DSG each authority will receive for those years, including their allocation for personalised learning. That statement and more detailed information may be found on the Teachernet website at: www.teachernet.gov.uk/management/schoolfunding/200607 funding arrangements/.

Private Finance Initiative Contracts

Sally Keeble: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how many (a) secondary and (b) primary schools in each local authority area are involved in private finance initiative contracts.

Jacqui Smith: Set out in the following table is the breakdown by local authority area of primary and secondary schools involved in private finance initiative contracts. For clarity I have further separated out those schools that are now deemed as all through, namely covering both primary and secondary provision in the one establishment.
	
		Number
		
			 Local authority Primary Secondary All-through 
		
		
			 Barking and Dagenham 0 2  
			 Barnsley 13 0  
			 Bedfordshire 0 2  
			 Birmingham 6 3  
			 Bolton 1 0  
			 Brent 0 1  
			 Brighton and Hove 0 4  
			 Bristol 0 4  
			 Calderdale 1 4  
			 Camden 0 1  
			 Cheshire 5 1  
			 Cornwall 38 6  
			 Coventry 0 1  
			 Croydon 0 1  
			 Darlington 2 1 1 
			 Derby 3 2  
			 Derbyshire 0 4  
			 Devon 1 0  
			 Doncaster 0 2  
			 Dorset 0 1  
			 Dudley 75 20 4 
			 Ealing 4 3  
			 East Riding of Yorkshire 4 2  
			 East Sussex 4 1  
			 Enfield 2 2  
			 Essex 12 4  
			 Gateshead 5 2  
			 Haringey 0 8  
			 Harrow 1 2  
			 Havering 0 1  
			 Herefordshire 0 1  
			 Hillingdon 0 1  
			 Kent 1 7  
			 Kingston-upon-Hull 1 0  
			 Kirklees 9 12 3 
			 Lambeth 0 16  
			 Lancashire 0 1  
			 Leeds 16 8  
			 Lewisham 71 11 1 
			 Lincolnshire 4 3  
			 Liverpool 13 7  
			 Manchester 1 1  
			 Merton 0 6  
			 Newcastle-upon-Tyne 2 3  
			 Newham 33 2  
			 Norfolk 11 1  
			 North Tyneside 3 1  
			 Northamptonshire 37 11  
			 Nottinghamshire 1 6 1 
			 Portsmouth 0 1  
			 Redbridge 0 1  
			 Redcar and Cleveland 2 0  
			 Richmond-upon-Thames 6 0  
			 Rochdale 3 1  
			 Rotherham 12 6  
			 Salford 0 3  
			 Sandwell 5 0  
			 Sheffield 3 7 1 
			 South Tyneside 0 1  
			 Southampton 0 3  
			 Staffordshire 1 1  
			 Stockton-on-Tees 1 1  
			 Stoke-on-Trent 75 17 5 
			 Sunderland 0 1  
			 Swindon 4 3  
			 Tameside 2 1  
			 Telford and Wrekin 1 1 1 
			 Torbay 1 1  
			 Tower Hamlets 15 5 1 
			 Walsall 0 1  
			 Waltham Forest 7 2  
			 Warwickshire 139 36  
			 West Sussex 0 1  
			 Wiltshire 1 2  
			 Wirral 1 8  
			 Wolverhampton 0 22  
			 Worcestershire 0 41  
			 York 3 1

Post-Graduate Certificate in Education

Nick Gibb: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills 
	(1)  what guidance is issued by her Department on the interviewing of applicants for post-graduate certificate in education courses;
	(2)  what steps her Department is taking (a) to monitor and (b) standardise interviews for admission to post-graduate certificate in education courses.

Jacqui Smith: The entry requirements for Initial Teacher Training (ITT) are contained in Qualifying to teach, the Secretary of State's Standards for the award of qualified teacher status and Requirements for Initial Teacher Training. These apply to all routes into teachingnot only PGCE. Comprehensive guidance on all of the ITT requirements, including those that relate to entry and interview requirements, are provided in the TDA's accompanying Handbook of Guidance. Requirement 1.8 states that:
	All providers must ensure that, as part of the selection procedures, candidates admitted for training have taken part in a group or individual interview.
	Guidance is provided on pages 70 and 71 of the Handbook and provides examples of the kinds of evidence that would be used in order to assess whether candidates have the full range of qualities needed to be a successful teacher. Guidance also notes the requirement for partnership schools to be involved in the selection process.
	The monitoring of selection and entry procedures is undertaken by Ofsted. Every Ofsted inspection of an accredited ITT provider will provide a judgement about the quality of the management and quality assurance of training provision Through interview and other mechanisms, all providers must make judgments of every applicant in accordance with the Requirements. These include judgments relating to:
	Capability of an applicant to meet the Standards
	GCSE or equivalent entry criteria
	Physical and mental fitness to teach
	Criminal background
	Communication skills
	Degree held (in the case of PGCE)
	However, providers may set their own entry requirements additional to those prescribed by the Secretary of State.

Racism

Ashok Kumar: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how many racist incidents among pupils were recorded in (a) primary schools, (b) secondary schools and (c) further education institutions in (i) England, (ii) the Tees Valley and (iii) Middlesbrough South and East Cleveland in each year since 1997.

Jacqui Smith: Data on racist incidents is best collected, analysed and acted on at the local level. The Department does not therefore collect information on racist incidents at a national level. Schools are required to record all racist incidents and report them to their local authorities at least annually.
	The requirement to record and report all racist incidents in schools came into force in November 1999. Therefore there is no data available for the years 199799. Until 2004, Middlesbrough included data on racist incidents in schools in their consolidated racist incidents reporting scheme. On the basis of information provided by Middlesbrough, in 200405 there were 37 racist incidents in primary schools and 68 in secondary.
	Information in relation to racist incidents among students in further education institutions in England is unavailable as statistics are not routinely collated by the Department or by the Learning and Skills Council (LSC), the main funding body for further education, although individual colleges and some local LSCs may do so. On the basis of information supplied by the LSC, Tees Valley LLSC recorded two racist incidents in 200304, one in 200405, and nine in 200506.

Safeguarding Children's Boards

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how many local safeguarding children's boards have been set up.

Maria Eagle: The most recent data comes from DfES investigations in October 2005 to find out how local areas were putting in place the various reforms in the Government's Every Child Matters programme. 26 Local Safeguarding Children Boards had been established at that point while in a further 94 local areas, transition arrangements to move from Area Child Protection Committees to Local Safeguarding Children Boards by the deadline of 1 April 2006 had been agreed by the Local Authority. Based on these figures and informal contacts with local authorities we expect all English local authorities to have LSCBs in place by 1 April 2006.

School Finance

Sharon Hodgson: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what the annual funding per pupil has been in (a) Gateshead and (b) Sunderland constituencies in each year since 1997.

Jacqui Smith: The information requested is only available on the basis of local authority areas. The following table sets out the figures for each financial year from 199798 to 200506.
	
		Total funding per pupil aged three to 19 in Gateshead and Sunderland 
		
			  Real terms, excluding pensions transfer to EPS and LSC 199798 to 200506 
			  Gateshead Sunderland 
		
		
			 199798 2,770 2,820 
			 199899 2,910 2,900 
			 19992000 3,050 3,030 
			 200001 3,340 3,310 
			 200102 3,550 3,520 
			 200203 3,660 3,610 
			 200304 3,860 3,810 
			 200405 3,990 3,950 
			 200506 4,160 4,150 
		
	
	Notes:
	1. Price base: Real terms at 200405 prices, based on GDP deflators as at 23 December 2005.
	2. Figures reflect relevant sub-blocks of Standard Spending Assessment/Education Formula Spending (EFS) settlements and exclude the pensions transfer to EFS and LSC.
	3. Total funding also includes all revenue grants in DfES Departmental Expenditure Limits relevant to pupils aged three to 19 and exclude Education Maintenance Allowances (EMAs) and grants not allocated at LEA level.
	4. The pupil numbers used to convert  million figures to  per pupil are those underlying the SSA/EFS settlement calculations plus PLASC three-year-old maintained pupils and estimated three to four-year-olds funded through state support in maintained and other educational institutions where these are not included in the SSA pupil numbers.
	5. Rounding: Figures are rounded to the nearest 10.
	Status:
	200506 figures are provisional as some grants have not yet been finalised/audited.

School Finance

Dan Norris: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what the annual funding per pupil has been in (a) Bath and North East Somerset and (b) South Gloucestershire in each year since 1992.

Jacqui Smith: As a result of data changes and changes to the school funding system, comparable figures are not available for 199297. The table sets out the figures in real terms for each financial year from 199798 to 200506. Total funding includes funding via Education Formula Spending/Standard Spending Assessment and revenue grants allocated at an LEA level.
	In 200304 an additional 640 million was transferred into Education Formula Spending in respect of teachers pensions. This transfer has been excluded from the figures provided so they are on a comparable basis for years before and after the transfer.
	
		Funding per pupil aged three to 19 in Bath and North East Somerset and South Gloucestershire 
		
			  Real terms, excluding pensions transfer to EPS and LSC 199798 to 200506 
			  Bath and North East Somerset South Gloucestershire 
		
		
			 199798 2,680 2,610 
			 199899 2,750 2,680 
			 19992000 2,890 2,810 
			 200001 3,100 2,990 
			 200102 3,200 3,090 
			 200203 3,300 3,210 
			 200304 3,410 3,340 
			 200405 3,570 3,480 
			 200506 3,760 3,660 
		
	
	Notes:
	1. Price base: Real terms at 200405 prices, based on GDP deflators as at 23 December 2005.
	2. Figures reflect relevant sub-blocks of Standard Spending Assessment/Education Formula Spending (EFS) settlements and exclude the pensions transfer to EFS and LSC.
	3. Total funding also includes all revenue grants in DfES departmental expenditure limits relevant to pupils aged three to 19 and exclude Education Maintenance Allowances (EMAs) and grants not allocated at LEA level.
	4. The pupil numbers used to convert  million figures to  per pupil are those underlying the SSA/EFS settlement calculations plus PLASC three-year-old maintained pupils and estimated three to four-year-olds funded through state support in maintained and other educational institutions where these are not included in the SSA pupil numbers.
	5. Rounding: figures are rounded to the nearest 10.
	Status:
	200506 figures are provisional as some grants have not yet been finalised/audited.

School Management Costs

Derek Wyatt: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what assessment has been undertaken to compare management costs imposed by local authorities for the administration of her policies in schools.

Jacqui Smith: The Department does not collect information on management costs within local authorities. However the available information for the costs relating to central administration within local education authorities is given in the following table:
	
		Local authority central administration(71) ranked as a percentage of total education spending for financial year 200405(72)
		
			 Local authority name Central administration net current expenditure(71) () Total education spending net current expenditure () Expenditure on central administration as a percentage of total education spending Ranking (from highest to lowest percentage of total education spending spent on central administration)(73) 
		
		
			 England 560,717,875 33,294,983,910 1.7  
			 Barking and Dagenham 3,497,542 146,987,102 2.4 29 
			 Barnet 4,464,101 215,184,171 2.1 43 
			 Barnsley 3,168,952 145,977,337 2.2 40 
			 Bath and North East Somerset 2,453,151 107,302,299 2.3 33 
			 Bedfordshire 1,782,204 259,303,729 0.7 143 
			 Bexley 2,156,000 169,639,723 1.3 112 
			 Birmingham 12,242,677 827,443,320 1.5 91 
			 Blackburn with Darwen 2,998,785 113,431,229 2.6 23 
			 Blackpool 2,015,189 94,129,430 2.1 42 
			 Bolton 2,348,475 189,606,156 1.2 114 
			 Bournemouth 1,458,023 86,343,883 1.7 69 
			 Bracknell Forest 1,123,695 63,934,846 1.8 63 
			 Bradford 7,495,685 364,979,401 2.1 44 
			 Brent 1,614,518 201,768,885 0.8 139 
			 Brighton and Hove 1,946,398 133,431,395 1.5 92 
			 Bristol City of 3,138,681 215,485,577 1.5 93 
			 Bromley 2,621,689 193,177,205 1.4 101 
			 Buckinghamshire 7,047,408 328,998,756 2.1 41 
			 Bury 2,177,794 114,724,055 1.9 53 
			 Calderdale 6,296,915 143,064,537 4.4 6 
			 Cambridgeshire 5,679,636 313,234,223 1.8 55 
			 Camden 2,796,887 149,509,453 1.9 54 
			 Cheshire 8,252,556 425,738,378 1.9 49 
			 City of London3 443,317 3,738,630 11.9 2 
			 Cornwall 6,618,857 329,344,344 2.0 47 
			 Coventry 4,019,215 226,178,609 1.8 57 
			 Croydon 3,019,147 219,330,095 1.4 99 
			 Cumbria 3,405,557 326,735,872 1.0 129 
			 Darlington 964,904 62,390,712 1.5 84 
			 Derby 2,656,381 167,223,447 1.6 80 
			 Derbyshire 5,985,352 452,578,115 1.3 105 
			 Devon 7,040,185 397,563,956 1.8 59 
			 Doncaster 4,134,337 210,880,206 2.0 48 
			 Dorset 4,577,470 259,196,526 1.8 61 
			 Dudley 2,114,206 209,764,332 1.0 130 
			 Durham 2,878,503 333,872,414 0.9 137 
			 Baling 7,158,210 205,460,411 3.5 11 
			 East Riding of Yorkshire 3,209,491 200,641,767 1.6 77 
			 East Sussex 360,454 292,834,817 0.1 149 
			 Enfield 7,412,973 232,615,982 3.2 13 
			 Essex 7,781,602 823,194,132 0.9 132 
			 Gateshead 2,282,803 142,891,356 1.6 78 
			 Gloucestershire 10,274,226 349,348,344 2.9 18 
			 Greenwich 2,354,736 196,190,810 1.2 118 
			 Hackney 7,560,565 162,540,025 4.7 4 
			 Halton 2,390,688 94,534,011 2.5 27 
			 Hammersmith and Fulham 1,006,018 108,453,087 0.9 135 
			 Hampshire 9,438,351 701,265,696 1.3 102 
			 Haringey 86,648 191,150,232 0.0 150 
			 Harrow 1,217,836 131,788,047 0.9 136 
			 Hartlepool 1,042,329 67,345,674 1.5 83 
			 Havering 2,171,455 156,707,131 1.4 98 
			 Herefordshire 1,605,444 98,210,636 1.6 74 
			 Hertfordshire 8,436,383 705,922,748 1.2 119 
			 Hillingdon 1,119,568 174,770,694 0.6 145 
			 Hounslow 2,712,353 178,232,426 1.5 86 
			 Isle of Wight 1,142,813 85,688,761 1.3 103 
			 Isles Of Scilly(73) 318,968 2,616,422 12.2 1 
			 Islington 3,605,848 139,303,314 2.6 24 
			 Kensington and Chelsea 543,575 76,787,906 0.7 142 
			 Kent 13,269,655 883,993,201 1.5 90 
			 Kingston upon Hull City of 1,886,598 174,249,299 1.1 128 
			 Kingston upon Thames 2,070,327 94,508,690 2.2 39 
			 Kirklees 4,319,800 271,230,900 1.6 79 
			 Knowsiey 2,191,849 115,210,777 1.9 52 
			 Lambeth 2,945,995 170,296,754 1.7 66 
			 Lancashire 8,705,686 750,413,163 1.2 125 
			 Leeds 7,461,684 471,975,682 1.6 81 
			 Leicester 1,653,204 224,476,605 0.7 140 
			 Leicestershire 8,559,226 382,563,665 2.2 35 
			 Lewisham 6,631,767 217,244,019 3.1 16 
			 Lincolnshire 2,989,499 409,202,380 0.7 141 
			 Liverpool 4,556,882 377,773,839 1.2 116 
			 Luton 5,092,606 159,468,662 3.2 12 
			 Manchester 4,498,752 352,987,395 1.3 111 
			 Medway 1,314,100 194,123,827 0.7 144 
			 Merton 4,709,240 114,827,621 4.1 9 
			 Middlesbrough 1,597,571 96,117,215 1.7 71 
			 Milton Keynes 2,377,313 156,290,552 1.5 87 
			 Newcastle upon Tyne 2,380,758 185,149,569 1.3 110 
			 Newham 6,530,090 255,966,840 2.6 25 
			 Norfolk 2,742,939 525,932,056 0.5 147 
			 North East Lincolnshire 664,094 106,822,003 0.6 146 
			 North Lincolnshire 3,404,461 116,717,049 2.9 19 
			 North Somerset 1,950,008 110,933,655 1.8 62 
			 North Tyneside 1,983,717 129,404,451 1.5 85 
			 North Yorkshire 3,519,057 430,511,106 0.8 138 
			 Northamptonshire 5,424,737 407,685,446 1.3 104 
			 Northumberland 3,641,178 214,026,328 1.7 68 
			 Nottingham 5,906,500 193,985,849 3.0 17 
			 Nottinghamshire 9,253,125 478,640,705 1.9 50 
			 Oldham 3,942,875 175,530,418 2.2 34 
			 Oxfordshire 8,595,327 371,668,138 2.3 31 
			 Peterborough 3,779,251 131,315,548 2.9 20 
			 Plymouth 2,254,481 172,224,273 1.3 107 
			 Poole 1,246,424 75,052,828 1.7 72 
			 Portsmouth 2,649,173 112,883,835 2.3 30 
			 Reading 1,533,633 79,614,901 1.9 51 
			 Redbridge 3,347,260 192,758,669 1.7 64 
			 Redcar and Cleveland 1,258,171 106,243,919 1.2 120 
			 Richmond upon Thames 1,058,757 89,828,673 1.2 121 
			 Rochdale 2,306,392 161,259,275 1.4 95 
			 Rotherham 4,963,478 194,970,893 2.5 26 
			 Rutland 339,339 21,789,629 1.6 82 
			 Salford 1,764,882 150,772,105 1.2 123 
			 Sandwell 3,365,941 224,061,787 1.5 89 
			 Sefton 1,752,511 187,921,687 0.9 134 
			 Sheffield 3,696,312 315,711,249 1.2 122 
			 Shropshire 1,504,578 159,457,245 0.9 133 
			 Slough 3,852,051 96,615,407 4.0 10 
			 Solihull 2,991,651 136,104,069 2.2 38 
			 Somerset 1,514,284 296,133,182 0.5 148 
			 South Gloucestershire 1,977,000 157,865,932 1.3 113 
			 South Tyneside 4,862,665 112,458,717 4.3 7 
			 Southampton 3,794,644 135,139,091 2.8 21 
			 Southend-on-Sea 1,490,830 113,682,074 1.3 106 
			 Southwark 10,014,592 214,187,125 4.7 3 
			 St. Helens 1,516,417 125,097,884 1.2 115 
			 Staffordshire 4,976,204 495,767,539 1.0 131 
			 Stockport 1,962,724 162,725,099 1.2 117 
			 Stockton-on-Tees 2,103,677 129,025,009 1.6 75 
			 Stoke-on-Trent 4,375,558 162,114,222 2.7 22 
			 Suffolk 8,300,029 408,695,482 2.0 45 
			 Sunderland 4,779,723 208,285,729 2.3 32 
			 Surrey 10,026,368 578,937,725 1.7 65 
			 Sutton 2,300,816 134,313,691 1.7 67 
			 Swindon 2,294,823 113,428,106 2.0 46 
			 Tameside 2,019,000 141,256,788 1.4 96 
			 Telford and Wrekin 1,551,105 111,815,102 1.4 97 
			 Thurrock 1,928,610 108,143,264 1.8 56 
			 Torbay 1,986,909 81,915,361 2.4 28 
			 Tower Hamlets 11,026,422 245,405,314 4.5 5 
			 Trafford 1,899,459 125,761,395 1.5 88 
			 Wakefield 2,420,042 207,747,175 1.2 124 
			 Walsall 8,041,846 189,164,612 4.3 8 
			 Waltham Forest 5,177,572 169,066,651 3.1 15 
			 Wandsworth 2,098,459 153,533,914 1.4 100 
			 Warrington 1,990,209 119,313,453 1.7 70 
			 Warwickshire 7,295,198 327,872,209 2.2 36 
			 West Berkshire 1,159,670 104,108,587 1.1 126 
			 West Sussex 6,153,319 427,553,729 1.4 94 
			 Westminster 1,642,638 125,928,235 1.3 108 
			 Wigan 3,555,475 200,777,355 1.8 58 
			 Wiltshire 2,867,529 262,171,741 1.1 127 
			 Windsor and Maidenhead 1,487,289 84,086,977 1.8 60 
			 Wirral 3,674,634 223,796,278 1.6 73 
			 Wokingham 1,197,186 92,994,847 1.3 109 
			 Wolverhampton 2,895,380 180,125,791 1.6 76 
			 Worcestershire 6,950,942 315,747,798 2.2 37 
			 York 3,105,994 99,640,100 3.1 14 
		
	
	(71) Central administration covers the overall management of the local authority's responsibility in relation to education.
	(72) 200405 figures in cash terms as reported by local authorities as at 23 February 2006.
	(73) Due to having only one school, Isles of Scilly LA and City of London LA will have a different expenditure pattern than other authorities which will include some fixed central administration costs which are unavoidable regardless of the size of the local authority. Consequently the expenditure on central administration as a percentage of total education spending by City of London and Isles of Scilly LA's should not be compared with other authorities

Special Educational Needs

Stewart Jackson: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what proportion of Peterborough local education authority's total budget was spent on special needs education in each of the last seven years.

Jacqui Smith: The available information is contained within the following table. Similar data are not available before 200001:
	
		Budgeted net expenditure on the provision of education for children with special educational needs(74)(75) by Peterborough local authority since 200001
		
			  Budgeted net expenditure on the provision of education for children with special educational needs () Total Education Revenue Expenditure(76)() Budgeted net expenditure on the provision of education for children with SEN as a percentage of total education revenue expenditure 
		
		
			 200001 12,325,000 82,092,000 15.0 
			 200102 13,410,000 88,259,000 15.2 
			 200203 14,787,000 94,086,000 15.7 
			 200304 16,936,000 103,083,000 16.4 
			 200405 18,620,000 109,591,000 17.0 
			 200506(77) 20,337,000 121,620,000 16.7 
		
	
	(74) Includes planned expenditure on the provision for pupils with statements and the provision for non-statemented pupils with SEN, support for inclusion, inter authority recoupment, fees for pupils at independent special schools and abroad, educational psychology service, local authority functions in relation to child protection, therapies and other health related services, parent partnership, guidance and information, the monitoring of SEN provision and inclusion administration, assessment and co-ordination. Also included is the funding delegated to nursery, primary and secondary schools identified as notional SEN and the individual schools budget (ISB) for special schools.
	(75) The ISB for special schools will include some general education costs for pupils with SEN in addition to those costs specifically for SEN while the figures recorded against notional SEN are only indicative of the amount that might be spent by schools on SEN and, from 200405 onwards, notional SEN delegated to nursery schools was reported on Section 52 for the first time and this accounts for 18,000 of the 200506 total. In 200506, Peterborough also budgeted 1.7 million for SEN transport expenditure but this is not included in the budgeted net expenditure on SEN as figures are not available prior to 200506.
	(76) Total Education Revenue Expenditure is the combination of the total schools budget and the total LEA budget.
	(77) Cash terms figures as reported by Peterborough local authority as at 27 February 2006.
	Note:
	Figures are rounded to the nearest thousand pounds and may not sum due to rounding.
	The data are drawn from Peterborough local authority's Section 52 Budget Statements (Tables 1 and 2) submitted to the DfES.

Teachers' Pay

Stewart Jackson: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what guidance she plans to issue to local education authorities concerning variations of pay agreements under the School Teachers' Pay and Conditions Document, with regard to the non-provision of childcare tax vouchers as a non-cash benefit; whether her Department plans to review this policy; and if she will make a statement.

Jacqui Smith: I refer the hon. Member to the answer given by my hon. Friend the Minister for Children, Young People and Families on 12 September 2005, Official Report, column 2337W, on the Childcare Vouchers Scheme,. We have since conducted an informal consultation with representatives of teacher unions and employers on making provision in the statutory School Teachers' Pay and Conditions Document to enable teachers to access tax-beneficial schemes, including childcare vouchers, on a salary sacrifice basis, and are currently considering the issues arising.